COOKE v. CEKOVIC

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

A party moving for leave to renew a prior motion "based upon evidence that could have been proffered previously should demonstrate a reasonable excuse for failing to do so" (Cannistra v. Gibbons, 224 A.D.2d 570, 571; see, Motts v. Cohen, 264 A.D.2d 764; Gadson v. New York Hous. Auth., 263 A.D.2d 464; Strong v. Brookhaven Mem. Hosp. Med. Ctr., 240 A.D.2d 726). The plaintiff failed to offer any excuse as to why the evidence proffered in support of his motion, in effect, for leave to renew, was not submitted previously.

In any event, even if the evidence submitted on renewal was to be considered, the defendants could not be held liable as a matter of law because the sole legal cause of the plaintiff's injuries was his intentional act of jumping off the defendants' roof (see, Olsen v. Town of Richfield, 81 N.Y.2d 1024, 1026; see also, Egan v. A.J. Constr. Corp., 94 N.Y.2d 839; Donohue v. Copiague Union Free School Dist., 6429, affd 47 N.Y.2d 440).

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.