AMANKWA v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY

Since defendant's "renewal" motion was, in essence, a motion for "reargument", the order denying the motion is not appealable ( Oppenheimer Co. v. Oppenheim, Appel, Dixon Co., 173 A.D.2d 203, 204). Defendant's "renewal" motion was based on citation of recent cases that merely reaffirmed existing law and thus, did not constitute new "law not previously considered" by the IAS Court ( Johnston v. National R.R. Passenger Corp., 161 A.D.2d 288, 289). Were we not dismissing this appeal, we would find it to be without merit.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rubin, Ross and Tom, JJ.