As it appears from the text of the defendant’s reply (page 1), the defendant is aware of the following provisions of CRLR 2221 (d): “a motion for leave to reargue: shall be made within thirty days after service of a copy of the order determining the prior motion and written notice of its entry. This rule shall not apply to motions to reargue a decision made by the appellate division or the court of appeals”. The notice of entry wasn’t given to him.
He is also aware of the following provisions of CRLR (e): “motion for leave to renew shall be based upon new facts not offered on the prior motion that would change the prior determination or shall demonstrate that there has been a change in the law that would change the prior determination”. Accordingly, I accrued the right to renew as late as on the 19th of April after the decision of the Court of Appeal was announced.
A combined motion for leave to reargue and leave to renew shall identify separately and support separately each item of relief sought (CRLR 2221 (f).
When there has been a mistrial for any reason, such action must be restored to the appropriate ready calendar for a day certain to be fixed by the court (Section 212.14).
" Litigants are entitled, as a matter of law, to a fair trial" (Rodriguez v City of New York, 67 AD3d 884, 886; see DeCrescenzo v Gonzalez, 46 AD3d 607, 608).