Di Guilmi v. Bress

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Di Guilmi v. Bress

51 A.D.2d 1014, 381 N.Y.S.2d 115, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11781

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 15, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 51 A.D.2d 1014 (Di Guilmi v. Bress) 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

Di Guilmi v. Bress, 51 A.D.2d 1014, 381 N.Y.S.2d 115, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11781 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, entered April 2, 1975, which granted plaintiffs’ motion for leave to (1) vacate a prior order of preclusion, (2) serve a further bill of particulars and (3) serve an amended complaint with increased ad damnum provisions. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Plaintiffs have proceeded in accordance with the prior orders which granted them leave to renew upon the submission of affidavits' establishing a causal relationship between the accident to plaintiff Rosa Di Guilmi and her subsequent surgery. The prior order of February 10, 1975 advised plaintiffs first to seek vacatur of the order of preclusion. In the interests of justice, plaintiffs should be granted the relief sought despite the rather equivocal statements in the medical certificate furnished. It is for the trier of the facts to resolve the issue whether a head injury can result in the necessity for a hysterectomy some seven months after the accident. Central to our holding is the express legislative mandate that leave to amend "shall be freely given” (see CPLR 3025, subd [b]). Gulotta, P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Margett and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

—In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, entered April 2, 1975, which granted plaintiffs’ motion for leave to (1) vacate a prior order of preclusion, (2) serve a further bill of particulars and (3) serve an amended complaint with increased ad damnum provisions. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Plaintiffs have proceeded in accordance with the prior orders which granted them leave to renew upon the submission of affidavits' establishing a causal relationship between the accident to plaintiff Rosa Di Guilmi and her subsequent surgery. The prior order of February 10, 1975 advised plaintiffs first to seek vacatur of the order of preclusion. In the interests of justice, plaintiffs should be granted the relief sought despite the rather equivocal statements in the medical certificate furnished. It is for the trier of the facts to resolve the issue whether a head injury can result in the necessity for a hysterectomy some seven months after the accident. Central to our holding is the express legislative mandate that leave to amend "shall be freely given” (see CPLR 3025, subd [b]). Gulotta, P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Margett and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 1014, 381 N.Y.S.2d 115, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11781, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/di-guilmi-v-bress-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack