Jankay v. Clearoll Poly Film, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jankay v. Clearoll Poly Film, Inc.

59 A.D.2d 935, 399 N.Y.S.2d 452, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14169

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

DecidedNovember 28, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 59 A.D.2d 935 (Jankay v. Clearoll Poly Film, 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

Jankay v. Clearoll Poly Film, Inc., 59 A.D.2d 935, 399 N.Y.S.2d 452, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14169 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiff appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 23, 1976, which denied her motion for leave to (a) amend the ad damnum clause of her complaint and (b) serve a further bill of particulars and (2) a further order of the same court, dated August 2, 1976, which denied her motion to resettle tlje prior order. Order dated June 23, 1976 reversed, without costs or disbursements, and motion granted. The time within which the amended bill of particulars may be served is extended until 20 days after entry of the order to be made hereon. Appeal from the order dated August 2, 1976 dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements. In the circumstances disclosed, denial of leave to amend the ad damnum clause of the complaint constituted an improvident exercise of discretion. Hopkins, J. P., Latham, Cohalan and Damiani, 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, plaintiff appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 23, 1976, which denied her motion for leave to (a) amend the ad damnum clause of her complaint and (b) serve a further bill of particulars and (2) a further order of the same court, dated August 2, 1976, which denied her motion to resettle tlje prior order. Order dated June 23, 1976 reversed, without costs or disbursements, and motion granted. The time within which the amended bill of particulars may be served is extended until 20 days after entry of the order to be made hereon. Appeal from the order dated August 2, 1976 dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements. In the circumstances disclosed, denial of leave to amend the ad damnum clause of the complaint constituted an improvident exercise of discretion. Hopkins, J. P., Latham, Cohalan and Damiani, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 A.D.2d 935, 399 N.Y.S.2d 452, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14169, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jankay-v-clearoll-poly-film-inc-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack