Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion, with costs, the plaintiffs' motion is denied, and the order dated December 1, 2003, is reinstated.
The plaintiffs did not demonstrate that the Supreme Court overlooked or misapprehended matters of fact or law. Thus, the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the plaintiffs' motion, in effect, for leave to reargue ( see CPLR 2221 [d] [2]).