Deiso v. Mobil Oil Corp.
This text of 56 A.D.2d 621 (Deiso v. Mobil Oil Corp.) 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.
Opinion
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries predicated upon an assault, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated August 31, 1976, which denied, without prejudice to renewal, his motion for -leave to serve an amended complaint. Order reversed, with $50 costs and disbursements payable by respondents Mobil Oil Corporation and Eastchester Auto Clinic, and motion granted. Plaintiff shall serve the amended complaint within 20 days after entry of the order to be made hereon. Under the circumstances of this case, plaintiff’s attorney had greater knowledge of the facts which required an amended complaint than the plaintiff himself. Accordingly, the attorney’s affirmation is proper in lieu of the party’s affidavit of merits. In light of this State’s liberal policy toward amendment of pleadings (Mitchell v City of New York, 44 AD2d 852), Special Term should have granted plaintiff’s motion since there was no showing of prejudice. The original complaint seeks recovery for an intentional tort; the proposed amendment merely adds a negligence theory based upon the same incident. Rabin, Acting P. J., Shapiro, Titone and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
56 A.D.2d 621, 391 N.Y.S.2d 676, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10711, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deiso-v-mobil-oil-corp-nyappdiv-1977.