Weir v. Northwell Health, Inc.

Weir v Northwell Health, Inc. (2023 NY Slip Op 03258) Weir v Northwell Health, Inc. 2023 NY Slip Op 03258 Decided on June 14, 2023 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. Decided on June 14, 2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department BETSY BARROS, J.P. JOSEPH J. MALTESE DEBORAH A. DOWLING HELEN VOUTSINAS, JJ. 2021-00305 (Index No. 610329/19) [*1]Nicholas Weir, appellant, v Northwell Health, Inc., respondent. Nicholas Weir, Uniondale, NY, appellant pro se. Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., New York, NY (John G. Stretton and Daniel M. Bernstein of counsel), for respondent. DECISION & ORDER In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for employment discrimination in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Randy Sue Marber, J.), entered December 11, 2020. The order denied the plaintiff's motion for leave to reargue his opposition to the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint and the plaintiff's cross-motion for leave to amend the complaint, which prior motion and cross-motion had been granted and denied, respectively, in an order of the same court entered May 14, 2020. ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements. In this action, inter alia, to recover damages for employment discrimination in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law, the plaintiff appeals from an order which denied his motion for leave to reargue his opposition to the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint and his cross-motion for leave to amend the complaint. The Supreme Court had granted the defendant's motion, and had denied the plaintiff's cross-motion in an order entered May 14, 2020. The appeal must be dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument (see Vaccaro v Francolopez, 205 AD3d 759, 760; Wang v State of New York, 203 AD3d 1215, 1216). BARROS, J.P., MALTESE, DOWLING and VOUTSINAS, JJ., concur. ENTER: Maria T. Fasulo Clerk of the Court