Landlord appeals from (1) an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Kevin McClanahan, J.), entered on or about September 3, 2008, which, after a hearing, awarded tenant a rent abatement in the principal sum of $3,737.60 on her application to, inter alia, vacate a final judgment, and (2) an order (same court and Judge), entered on or about October 16, 2008, which denied landlord's motion, inter alia, to renew the September 3, 2008 order.

Per Curiam.

Orders (Kevin McClanahan, J.), entered on or about September 3, 2008 and October 16, 2008, affirmed, with $10 costs.

A trial court is vested with broad discretion to control its calendar (see 174 Second Equities Corp. v Hee Nam Bae, 57 AD3d 319 [2008]) and the grant or denial of a motion for an adjournment is addressed to the court's sound discretion (see Matter of Steven B., 6 NY3d 888 [2006]). Civil Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying landlord's application for an adjournment since landlord's need for an adjournment resulted from its own lack of due diligence in preparing for the hearing (see Mukhutdinov v Finch, 27 AD3d 285 [2006]). Nor did landlord present any newly discovered evidence warranting vacatur of the rent abatement award. Landlord failed to demonstrate that the purported new evidence was recently discovered or could not have been discovered by the exercise of due diligence (see Trump v Cheng, 63 AD3d 623 [2009]).

We have examined landlord's remaining contentions and find them to be lacking in merit.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: October 22, 2009