Amco International, Inc. v. Long Island Railroad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Amco International, Inc. v. Long Island Railroad

273 A.D.2d 421, 713 N.Y.S.2d 119, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7406

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 26, 2000·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover the cost of cleaning and removing a petroleum discharge pursuant to Navigation Law § 181, the defendant appeals from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (D’Emilio, J.), entered July 30, 1999, which, inter alia, denied its motion for leave to amend its answer.

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

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion for leave to amend its answer to assert the affirmative defense of sabotage, given the unexplained, approximately one-year delay in making the motion, and the dubious merit of the proposed defense (see, Navigation Law § 181 [4]; Branch v Abraham & Strauss Dept. Store, 220 AD2d 474).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J. P., Sullivan, Florio and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover the cost of cleaning and removing a petroleum discharge pursuant to Navigation Law § 181, the defendant appeals from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (D’Emilio, J.), entered July 30, 1999, which, inter alia, denied its motion for leave to amend its answer.

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

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion for leave to amend its answer to assert the affirmative defense of sabotage, given the unexplained, approximately one-year delay in making the motion, and the dubious merit of the proposed defense (see, Navigation Law § 181 [4]; Branch v Abraham & Strauss Dept. Store, 220 AD2d 474).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J. P., Sullivan, Florio and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Amco International, Inc. v. Long Island Railroad, 273 A.D.2d 421, 713 N.Y.S.2d 119, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7406 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

273 A.D.2d 421 (Amco International, Inc. v. Long Island Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related