On January 20, 2017, Justice Oing of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Borah, Goldstein, Altschuler, Nahins & Goidel, P.C. v. Trumbull Ins. Co., 2017 NY Slip Op. 30203(U), denying a motion for reargument advancing a new argument, explaining:
That branch of plaintiff’s motion to reargue based on a business interruption claim under the Business Income and Extra Expense provisions of the Business Policy is denied. A review of plaintiff’s original moving papers confirm that plaintiff did not move for summary judgment pursuant to the Business Interruption and the Extra Expense provisions of the Business Policy, but, instead, the Civil Authority, the Off-Premises Utility Services, and the Dependent Properties provisions. Because arguments pursuant to the Business Interruption and Extra Expense provisions were not raised in the prior motion or in opposition to the cross-motion, they cannot be considered in this reargument motion.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).