DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the appeal from the order entered October 25, 2001, is dismissed, as the appellant is not aggrieved by that order (see CPLR 5511); and it is further,
ORDERED that the order entered January 18, 2002, is affirmed; and it is further,
ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondent.
While a motion for leave to renew a prior motion should generally be based on newly-discovered facts, it is within the court's discretion to grant renewal even upon facts known to the movant at the time of the original motion (see Friedman v. U-Haul Truck Rental, 216 A.D.2d 266; Canzoneri v. Wigand Corp., 168 A.D.2d 593). Here, the Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion and accepted as new evidence proof that was available to the respondent at the time of the appellant's original motion.
Upon renewal, in response to the appellant having made out a prima facie case for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the respondent's opposition sufficiently raised triable issues of fact requiring the denial of the motion (see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 N.Y.2d 345).
ALTMAN, J.P., McGINITY, SCHMIDT and RIVERA, JJ., concur.