Reargument and Renewal Motions
When a New York court issues a decision that you believe overlooked a key fact, misapplied the law, or failed to consider information that has since come to light, you are not necessarily out of options. The Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) provide two important post-decision remedies: a motion to reargue and a motion to renew. Both are governed by CPLR 2221, and both offer a path to ask the same court that issued a ruling to reconsider its decision before pursuing the time, expense, and uncertainty of an appeal.
Our New York litigation attorneys regularly handle reargument and renewal motions across the state's trial and appellate courts. Understanding when and how to use these tools can be the difference between salvaging your case and accepting an unfavorable result. Below, we explain how these motions work, the strict standards that apply, and the strategic considerations every litigant should weigh.
What Is a Motion to Reargue?
A motion to reargue, authorized by CPLR 2221(d), asks the court to reconsider its prior decision on the ground that it overlooked or misapprehended the relevant facts or misapplied a controlling principle of law. Critically, a motion to reargue is not an opportunity to present new facts or new legal arguments that could have been raised originally. It is also not a vehicle simply to express disagreement with the court's conclusion.
The purpose of reargument is narrow: to give the court a chance to correct an error in its analysis of the materials that were already before it. New York courts have repeatedly emphasized that a party may not use reargument to relitigate questions already decided or to advance arguments that were available but not made the first time around.
Standard for Reargument
To succeed on a motion to reargue, the moving party must demonstrate that the court:
- Overlooked a fact contained in the original motion papers that, if properly considered, would have changed the outcome;
- Misapprehended the facts presented in the original submission; or
- Misapplied a controlling rule of law or legal principle.
Because the standard is demanding, success often turns on the moving party's ability to identify a specific, identifiable error in the court's reasoning rather than a general dissatisfaction with the result.
What Is a Motion to Renew?
A motion to renew, governed by CPLR 2221(e), serves a fundamentally different function. It permits a party to bring new facts or evidence to the court's attention that were not offered on the prior motion, or to demonstrate that there has been a change in the controlling law that would alter the prior determination.
Unlike reargument, a motion to renew is forward-looking and evidence-based. It acknowledges that the original record was incomplete and asks the court to revisit its ruling in light of additional information.
Standard for Renewal
CPLR 2221(e) imposes two essential requirements on a motion to renew:
- The motion must be based upon new facts not offered on the prior motion that would change the prior determination, or must demonstrate a change in the law; and
- The motion must contain a reasonable justification for the failure to present those facts on the original motion.
This second requirement is frequently the deciding factor. A party cannot simply withhold available evidence and later seek a second chance. The moving party must explain, in a manner the court finds reasonable, why the new evidence was not submitted initially. While New York courts retain some discretion to excuse a less-than-perfect justification in the interest of justice, the rule is intended to prevent piecemeal litigation and repeated bites at the apple.
Key Differences Between Reargument and Renewal
| Feature | Motion to Reargue (CPLR 2221[d]) | Motion to Renew (CPLR 2221[e]) |
|---|---|---|
| Basis | Court overlooked facts or misapplied law | New facts or a change in the law |
| New evidence allowed? | No | Yes |
| Deadline | 30 days after service of the order with notice of entry | No fixed statutory deadline |
| Appealability | Order denying reargument is generally not appealable | Order deciding renewal is generally appealable |
Critical Deadlines You Cannot Ignore
Timing is one of the most important distinctions between these motions. A motion to reargue must be made within 30 days after service of a copy of the order determining the prior motion, together with written notice of its entry. Missing this deadline can permanently foreclose the remedy of reargument.
A motion to renew, by contrast, is not subject to the same rigid 30-day limitation. Because renewal depends on new facts or changed law that may emerge after the original decision, courts allow greater flexibility. Nevertheless, a party should act promptly once new evidence becomes available, as undue delay can undermine the credibility of the motion and the reasonableness of the justification offered.
Importantly, the time to take an appeal generally continues to run while a reargument motion is pending. Because a denial of reargument is typically not appealable, a litigant who relies solely on reargument may lose the right to appeal the underlying order. This makes coordinated strategy essential.
Combining and Choosing Between Motions
CPLR 2221(f) permits a party to combine a motion to reargue and a motion to renew in a single set of papers, provided the moving party identifies the relief sought under each branch separately. When the two are combined, the court must decide each branch independently. A skilled litigator will often analyze whether the situation calls for one motion, the other, or both, depending on whether the goal is to correct a legal or factual error in the existing record, to introduce new evidence, or both.
Strategic Considerations Before Filing
While reargument and renewal motions can be powerful tools, they are not appropriate in every situation. Before filing, consider the following:
- Strength of the error or new evidence. Courts are reluctant to disturb their own decisions absent a clear basis. A motion grounded in genuine error or compelling new facts is far more likely to succeed than one that merely reargues lost positions.
- Preservation of appellate rights. Because the appellate clock continues to run, you should not assume a reargument motion buys additional time to appeal. In many cases, a protective notice of appeal should be filed.
- Cost and delay. A motion that has little chance of success may invite criticism from the court and increase litigation costs without advancing your position.
- Credibility with the court. Filing a meritorious, well-supported motion preserves your credibility. Repeated or frivolous motions can damage your standing in the eyes of the judge.
How Our New York Litigation Attorneys Can Help
Reargument and renewal motions require precise legal analysis, careful attention to deadlines, and a clear-eyed assessment of strategy. A motion that is poorly framed, untimely, or based on the wrong statutory ground will almost certainly fail. Our attorneys evaluate the original decision, the existing record, and any newly available evidence to determine the strongest path forward, whether that is a motion to reargue, a motion to renew, a combined motion, or a direct appeal.
We represent individuals and businesses throughout New York in trial-level and appellate litigation, and we understand how to position a reconsideration motion for the best possible chance of success while protecting your right to appeal.
If you have received an unfavorable decision in a New York court and believe the court overlooked critical facts, misapplied the law, or that new evidence has emerged, time may be limited. Contact our office today to schedule a consultation and learn whether a motion to reargue or renew is the right strategy for your case.
You can contact us by phone at 212-233-1233 or by email at [email protected].
Speak With an Appellate Attorney
Albert Goodwin, Esq. is a licensed New York attorney with over 18 years of courtroom experience who handles appeals throughout New York. If you are considering an appeal — or defending one — he can be reached directly at 212-233-1233 or [email protected].
