De Fabio v. Nadler Rental Service, Inc.

27 A.D.2d 931, 278 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4508
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 3, 1967
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 27 A.D.2d 931 (De Fabio v. Nadler Rental Service, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
De Fabio v. Nadler Rental Service, Inc., 27 A.D.2d 931, 278 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4508 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Opinion

Orders of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated November 30, 1966 affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order of said court, dated December 6, 1966, dismissed, without costs. No appeal lies from an order denying reargument. The lengthy delay of defendant Margaret Associates, Inc., in making the motion to amend its answer so as to deny making a leasing agreement precludes this court from granting relief (Sarullo v. Newstand Realty Corp., 2 A D 2d 854 [2d Dept. 1956]; Luback v. Hirsch, 232 App. Div. 691 [2d Dept. 1931]). The motion was not made until almost a year after the death of defendant Held, the president of appellant, Margaret Associates, Inc., although it had knowledge since at least May, 1965 of the supposed defect in its answer. Despite the general rule in favor of free amendment of the pleadings (CPLR 3025, subd. [b]), where amendment would result in substantial prejudice to one of the parties because of something which has happened in the interim between the original pleading and the application to amend, and such harm could not be cured by the court, it would be an improvident exercise of discretion to allow such amendment (Washington Life Ins. Co. v. Scott, 119 App. Div. 847 [1st Dept, 1907]; Lentini v. St. Vincent’s Hosp., 19 A D 2d 652 [2d Dept. 1963]; 3 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N. Y. Civ. Prac., par. 3025.16 [1966]). Where the party who wishes to amend has or should have knowledge of the facts which he wishes to put in his later pleadings, but refrains from moving to amend for an inexcusably long period of time, his motion will be denied because of gross laches (Jennings v. Perkins, 277 App. Div. 1143 [2d Dept. 1950] ; Loureiro v. Long Is. R. R. Co., 22 A D 2d 763 [2d Dept. 1964]). Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Belton v. Lal Chicken, Inc.
138 A.D.3d 609 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Moeller v. Astor Chocolate Corp.
214 A.D.2d 548 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Garza v. VICO Utilities, Inc.
150 A.D.2d 520 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Gallo v. Aiello
139 A.D.2d 490 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Balport Construction Co. v. New York Telephone Co.
134 A.D.2d 309 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)
Fischer v. Broady
118 A.D.2d 827 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
Kennedy v. Calta
70 A.D.2d 930 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
Davis v. Brown
70 A.D.2d 873 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
Industrial National Mortgage Co. v. Shreve
70 A.D.2d 774 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
Birdsall v. City of New York
60 A.D.2d 522 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1977)
Alchus v. Ayers
57 A.D.2d 881 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1977)
Myrick v. Sleepy Hollow Lake, Inc.
89 Misc. 2d 657 (New York Supreme Court, 1977)
Gross v. Russo
54 A.D.2d 706 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)
Folsom Corp. v. Korvettes Division of Spartans Industries, Inc.
52 A.D.2d 574 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)
Griffin v. Columbia University
51 A.D.2d 896 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)
Cataldo v. Buglass
51 A.D.2d 717 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
27 A.D.2d 931, 278 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4508, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-fabio-v-nadler-rental-service-inc-nyappdiv-1967.