In Ramsco Inc. v. Riozzi (210 AD2d 592 [3d Dept 1994]), the Third Department found that where plaintiff did not represent that the "new" evidence was unavailable to it at the time of the original motion for summary judgment, and that plaintiff's reason for failing to submit the new evidence was not reasonable, denial of a renewal motion was not an abuse of discretion. In Ramsco, plaintiff claimed that it did present the new evidence on the original motion because it "did not expect that a primary basis for the court's decision would be its finding that the description was insufficient to identify the property, and could not anticipate that this finding would be based in large part on defendants' mischaracterizations with regard to the location and description of the property." However, the Court observed that the papers submitted by defendants on the original motion demonstrated that they raised the issue of the property description as one ground for dismissal of the complaint, and plaintiff's answering affidavit revealed its awareness of this argument and attempt to respond to it. "Though required to," stated the Court, "plaintiff simply did not lay bare all of its proof in opposition to the original motion."