Ordered that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The presumption with recorded deeds is that there was delivery as of the date thereof unless there is evidence to the contrary (see, Real Property Law § 244; Ten Eyck v. Whitbeck, 156 N.Y. 341, 352; Manhattan Life Ins. Co. v. Continental Ins. Co., 33 N.Y.2d 370; Whalen v. Harvey, 235 A.D.2d 792). The appellant offered no meaningful evidence to rebut the presumption of delivery. The documentary evidence in this case overwhelmingly supports the plaintiffs' position that the recorded deeds were delivered and accepted during the grantors' lifetime.
The purported new evidence submitted on the appellant's renewal motion was based on hearsay and, in any event, would not have altered the result (see, Matter of Krewer, 233 A.D.2d 127; Moshy v. Moshy, 227 A.D.2d 182; Misek-Falkoff v. Village of Pleasantville, 207 A.D.2d 332).
Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.