MAYER v. McBRUNIGAN CONSTRUCTION CORP

Order affirmed, with costs.

"Leave to renew should be denied unless the moving party offers a reasonable excuse as to why the additional facts were not submitted on the original application" (Caffee v Arnold, 104 A.D.2d 352; Teal v Place, 85 A.D.2d 788). No such reasonable excuse was offered at bar, where the additional evidence consisted for the most part of public records and information within the knowledge of the movants at the time of the original motion (see, Lo Breglio v Marks, 105 A.D.2d 621, affd 65 N.Y.2d 620; Silinsky v State-Wide Ins. Co., 30 A.D.2d 1). Thus Special Term did not err in denying the defendants' motion to renew. Lazer, J.P., Mangano, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.