2001 Commerce Street Corp. v. Star Enterprise

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

2001 Commerce Street Corp. v. Star Enterprise

306 A.D.2d 463, 761 N.Y.S.2d 493

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in 2001 Commerce Street Corp. v. Star Enterprise. Read the opinion of the Court — 14 A.D.3d 504 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 23, 2003·Published

Opinion

—In an action to re[464]*464cover damages for breach of a lease, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Bellantoni, J.), entered March 28, 2002, as denied those branches of its motion which were for leave to amend its complaint to include causes of action to recover damages for fraud and violation of the Town of Yorktown Code, and for punitive damages.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was for leave to amend the complaint to include a cause of action to recover damages for fraud, as it was time-barred (see CPLR 203 [fl, [g]; 213 [8]; Prestandrea v Stein, 262 AD2d 621 [1999]).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J.P., S. Miller, Goldstein and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—In an action to re[464]*464cover damages for breach of a lease, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Bellantoni, J.), entered March 28, 2002, as denied those branches of its motion which were for leave to amend its complaint to include causes of action to recover damages for fraud and violation of the Town of Yorktown Code, and for punitive damages.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was for leave to amend the complaint to include a cause of action to recover damages for fraud, as it was time-barred (see CPLR 203 [fl, [g]; 213 [8]; Prestandrea v Stein, 262 AD2d 621 [1999]).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J.P., S. Miller, Goldstein and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

2001 Commerce Street Corp. v. Star Enterprise, 306 A.D.2d 463, 761 N.Y.S.2d 493 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

306 A.D.2d 463 (2001 Commerce Street Corp. v. Star Enterprise) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related