Glassman v. ProHealth Ambulatory Surgery Center, Inc.
This text of 23 A.D.3d 523 (Glassman v. ProHealth Ambulatory Surgery Center, 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.
Opinion
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of an employment contract, the defendants appeal from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Warshawsky, J.), entered March 4, 2005, which, in effect, denied their motion for leave to renew their prior motion for leave to amend the answer to include certain counterclaims, and (2) an order of the same court entered March 24, 2005, which, sua sponte, amended the order entered March 4, 2005.
Ordered that the orders are affirmed, with one bill of costs.
Contrary to the contention of the defendants, the new facts provided on their motion for leave to renew did not establish that a particular provision of an employment agreement, which formed the basis for most of their proposed counterclaims, was [524]*524enforceable (see Glassman v ProHealth Ambulatory Surgery Ctr., Inc., 23 AD3d 522 [2005] [decided herewith]). Accordingly, the court correctly refused to grant the defendants leave to renew (see CPLR 2221 [e] [2]; cf. Kaufman v Kunis, 14 AD3d 542 [2005]). H. Miller, J.P., Luciano, Dillon and Covello, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
23 A.D.3d 523, 804 N.Y.S.2d 263, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glassman-v-prohealth-ambulatory-surgery-center-inc-nyappdiv-2005.