Shane v Rosenwaks, 2023 NY Slip Op 05236 [220 AD3d 519]

October 17, 2023

Appellate Division, First Department

[*1]

Barri Shane, Appellant,

v

Stacy Rosenwaks et al., Respondents.

Rivkah Rothschild, New York (Rivkah Rothschild of counsel) and Greenberg Traurig, Boston, MA (Gary Greenberg of counsel), for appellant.

The Law Offices of Alan S. Futerfas, New York (Alan S. Futerfas and Ellen B. Resnick of counsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Verna L. Saunders, J.), entered August 4, 2022, which denied plaintiff’s motion for leave to renew defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

We decline to dismiss the appeal under the circumstances. Nevertheless, we find that the court properly denied plaintiff’s motion for leave to renew defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint ( see CPLR 2221 [e]). The purported “new facts” proffered by plaintiff, set forth in unsworn documents, would have no bearing on the court’s consideration of the motion to dismiss because they concerned events that postdated the amended complaint, and plaintiff never sought leave to amend the pleadings ( see CPLR 3025 [b]).

We perceive no basis to grant defendants’ request to enjoin plaintiff from engaging in further pro se litigation related to the present claims without prior court approval at this time. Concur—Webber, J.P., Oing, Gesmer, Rodriguez, Rosado, JJ..