Home Indemnity Co. v. City of Long Beach

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Home Indemnity Co. v. City of Long Beach

57 A.D.2d 832, 393 N.Y.S.2d 921, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12034

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

DecidedMay 2, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 57 A.D.2d 832 (Home Indemnity Co. v. City of Long Beach) 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

Home Indemnity Co. v. City of Long Beach, 57 A.D.2d 832, 393 N.Y.S.2d 921, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12034 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action inter alia, on a contract, plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 22, 1976, as, upon granting its motion for reargument, adhered to that portion of a prior order of the same court which granted defendant-respondent’s motion for leave to amend its answer. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with $50 costs and disbursements. Leave to amend pleadings shall be freely given, unless substantial prejudice can be demonstrated (CPLR 3025). Plaintiff-appellant’s claim of prejudice is too speculative to justify denying defendant’s motion for leave to amend its answer. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Margett, Damiani and Rabin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action inter alia, on a contract, plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 22, 1976, as, upon granting its motion for reargument, adhered to that portion of a prior order of the same court which granted defendant-respondent’s motion for leave to amend its answer. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with $50 costs and disbursements. Leave to amend pleadings shall be freely given, unless substantial prejudice can be demonstrated (CPLR 3025). Plaintiff-appellant’s claim of prejudice is too speculative to justify denying defendant’s motion for leave to amend its answer. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Margett, Damiani and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 A.D.2d 832, 393 N.Y.S.2d 921, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12034, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/home-indemnity-co-v-city-of-long-beach-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack