DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order as denied that branch of the motion which was for leave to reargue is dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument; and it is further,
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondents are awarded one bill of costs.
A motion for leave to renew should be denied unless the moving party offers a reasonable justification as to why the new facts were not submitted on the prior motion (see, CPLR 2221[e]; Palmer v. Toledo, 266 A.D.2d 268). The plaintiffs failed to offer a reasonable justification for their failure to submit the affirmation of Dr. Ranga Krishna in opposition to the prior motion for summary judgment. Thus, that branch of the motion which was for leave to renew was properly denied (see, Good Samaritan Hosp. Med. Ctr. v. Ruscito, 287 A.D.2d 538 [2d Dept., Oct. 15, 2001]; Palmer v. Toledo, supra).
SANTUCCI, J.P., ALTMAN, FLORIO, H. MILLER and COZIER, JJ., concur.