Gardner v. Rockland Lake Caterers, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gardner v. Rockland Lake Caterers, Inc.

81 A.D.2d 631, 440 N.Y.S.2d 558, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11134

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

DecidedApril 20, 1981

StatusPublished

This text of 81 A.D.2d 631 (Gardner v. Rockland Lake Caterers, 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

Gardner v. Rockland Lake Caterers, Inc., 81 A.D.2d 631, 440 N.Y.S.2d 558, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11134 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by plaintiff from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, entered October 21, 1980, as granted defendant’s motion to amend its answer in order to add an affirmative defense. Order modified by adding thereto a provision granting plaintiff leave to conduct disclosure solely with respect to the new affirmative defense. As so modified, order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with $50 costs and disbursements to plaintiff. The amended answer in the form annexed to defendant’s motion papers is deemed served. The disclosure shall be completed by plaintiff within 60 days of service upon him of a copy of the order to be made hereon, with notice of entry. The trial of this action shall be stayed until plaintiff has completed the discovery permitted herein or until the aforesaid 60-day period has expired, whichever occurs first. Special Term did not abuse its discretion in granting defendant leave to amend its answer. However, since Special Term declined to strike the action from the Trial Calendar, it should [632]*632have granted plaintiff leave to conduct discovery with respect to the new affirmative defense asserted in the amended answer. Plaintiff is entitled to such discovery, which would otherwise be barred by the filing of the note of issue and statement of readiness (see 22 NYCRR Part 675). Margett, J.P., O’Connor, Weinstein and Thompson, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by plaintiff from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, entered October 21, 1980, as granted defendant’s motion to amend its answer in order to add an affirmative defense. Order modified by adding thereto a provision granting plaintiff leave to conduct disclosure solely with respect to the new affirmative defense. As so modified, order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with $50 costs and disbursements to plaintiff. The amended answer in the form annexed to defendant’s motion papers is deemed served. The disclosure shall be completed by plaintiff within 60 days of service upon him of a copy of the order to be made hereon, with notice of entry. The trial of this action shall be stayed until plaintiff has completed the discovery permitted herein or until the aforesaid 60-day period has expired, whichever occurs first. Special Term did not abuse its discretion in granting defendant leave to amend its answer. However, since Special Term declined to strike the action from the Trial Calendar, it should [632]*632have granted plaintiff leave to conduct discovery with respect to the new affirmative defense asserted in the amended answer. Plaintiff is entitled to such discovery, which would otherwise be barred by the filing of the note of issue and statement of readiness (see 22 NYCRR Part 675). Margett, J.P., O’Connor, Weinstein and Thompson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 A.D.2d 631, 440 N.Y.S.2d 558, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gardner-v-rockland-lake-caterers-inc-nyappdiv-1981.