Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, with costs, that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for leave to renew is denied, the order entered December 15, 2005 is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Westchester County, for a determination of that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for leave to serve a late notice of claim and to restore the action, on the merits.
The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for leave to renew since the relevant material offered in support of that branch of the motion did not constitute "new facts not offered on the prior motion" within the meaning of the pertinent rule (CPLR 2221 [e] [2]).
Because the Supreme Court, upon renewal, granted the plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the notice of claim, it, in effect, denied, as academic, that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for leave to serve a late notice of claim and to restore the action. Accordingly, we remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Westchester County, for a determination of that branch of the plaintiff's motion on the merits.