|Claimant short name:||ARRIAGA|
|Footnote (claimant name) :|
|Defendant(s):||THE STATE OF NEW YORK|
|Footnote (defendant name) :|
|Judge:||MAUREEN T. LICCIONE|
|Claimant's attorney:||Anthony Arriaga, pro se|
|Defendant's attorney:||HON. LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL
By: Dorothy M. Keogh, Assistant Attorney General
|Third-party defendant's attorney:|
|Signature date:||September 15, 2021|
|See also (multicaptioned case)|
Claimant, Anthony Arriaga, has brought a motion to reargue the decision and order of this Court dated March 19, 2021 and filed on March 26, 2021. The decision and order granted Defendant's motion to dismiss the claim (motion no. M-96022) and denied Claimant's motion to compel discovery as moot (motion no. M-94748). This motion was timely filed on April 16, 2021.
A motion for leave to reargue must be based on matters of fact or law allegedly overlooked or misapprehended by the court in determining a prior motion, and may not be used to advance arguments different than those presented on the prior motion (CPLR 2221 [d]; Foley v Roche, 68 AD2d 558 [1st Dept 1979]). Here, Claimant has failed to establish that this Court overlooked or misapprehended the relevant facts or misapplied any controlling principle of law in its determination to grant the motion to dismiss (CPLR 2212[d]; Mazinov v Rella, 79 AD3d 979 [2d Dept 2010]; Everhart v County of Nassau, 65 AD3d 1277 [2d Dept 2009]; Saccomagno v City of New York, 29 AD3d 979 [2d Dept 2006]; Rodriguez v State of New York, UID No. 2021-040-045 [Ct Cl, McCarthy, J., Sept. 7, 2021]).
In accordance with the foregoing, Claimant's motion is denied.
September 15, 2021
Hauppuage, New York
MAUREEN T. LICCIONE
Judge of the Court of Claims