On September 27, 2024, the Fourth Department issued a decision in Counsel Fin. Holdings LLC v. Sullivan Law, L.L.C., 2024 NY Slip Op. 04697, holding that a judge other than the one that issued a decision can decide a motion for reargument if the issuing judge is unavailable, explaining:
Defendants contend that Justice Chimes (hereinafter reargument motion court) had no authority to grant plaintiff’s motion for leave to reargue because Acting Justice Walker had issued the original order. We reject that contention. CPLR 2221 (a) provides that a motion for leave to reargue shall be made to the judge who signed the order, unless that judge is for any reason unable to hear it. Here, at the time plaintiff’s motion was heard by the reargument motion court, Acting Justice Walker had retired and was unable to hear it. Thus, the reargument motion court properly heard and decided plaintiff’s motion.
Defendants further contend that plaintiff engaged in gamesmanship by serving its motion for leave to reargue after Acting Justice Walker notified the parties of the date of his impending retirement, and setting a return date for a date after his retirement, and that the reargument motion court improperly rewarded that tactic. We reject that contention. Although it is fundamental that a judge may not review or overrule an order of another judge of co-ordinate jurisdiction in the same action or proceeding, it is also well established that the unavailability of a retired judge may permit a new judge to grant reargument in a proceeding, and here, as noted above, retired Acting Justice Walker was unable to hear the reargument motion. Moreover, plaintiff’s motion for leave to reargue was timely served following entry of the 2023 order. We further note that defendants made no effort to move, by order to show cause or otherwise, to have Acting Justice Walker hear the motion during the month remaining before he retired.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).