Casey, J.
Insofar as petitioner seeks to appeal from the order entered September 24, 1993, the appeal is untimely (see, CPLR 5513 [a]). Insofar as petitioner seeks to appeal from the denial of his motion to reargue, the order is not appealable (see, e.g., Burton v Coonrod, 170 A.D.2d 882, 883). As to the appeal of the award to respondents of reasonable costs and counsel fees, we see no basis to disturb Supreme Court's conclusion that petitioner's conduct in moving to reargue a patently meritless issue constituted frivolous conduct within the meaning of 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 (a).
Cardona, P.J., Mikoll, Mercure and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal from the order entered September 24, 1993 is dismissed, as untimely. Ordered that the order entered December 13, 1993 is affirmed, with costs.