Since the only evidence regarding the condition of the floor upon which plaintiff allegedly fell, on the date of the incident, establishes that the floor was shiny as "always," summary judgment was properly granted. (See, Silver v. Brodsky, 112 A.D.2d 213. ) Indeed, even considering the expert's affidavit, which was based on an examination of the floor (see, CPLR 3120) some two years after the incident, the evidence is wholly conclusory and fails to establish that a hazardous condition existed on the day of the incident or that defendants had any notice, actual or constructive, of the alleged hazardous condition (see, e.g., Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836).
Finally, plaintiff's motion to renew and reargue was correctly determined to be only a motion to reargue, in light of the fact that the alleged "new" evidence was within plaintiff's knowledge at the time of the initial motion for summary judgment (see, McFadden v. Long Is. R.R., 115 A.D.2d 644).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.