Mayers v. D'Agostino

444 N.E.2d 1323, 58 N.Y.2d 696, 458 N.Y.S.2d 904, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3916
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedDecember 2, 1982
StatusPublished
Cited by44 cases

This text of 444 N.E.2d 1323 (Mayers v. D'Agostino) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mayers v. D'Agostino, 444 N.E.2d 1323, 58 N.Y.2d 696, 458 N.Y.S.2d 904, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3916 (N.Y. 1982).

Opinion

opinion of the court

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

CPLR 3211 (subd [e]) provides, inter alia, that a defense based upon the doctrine of collateral estoppel is waived unless raised either in a responsive pleading or in a motion made before service of the responsive pleading is required.

Defendants raised the defense of collateral estoppel for the first time during the trial. Consequently, defendants waived this defense unless they could obtain leave to amend their answer to include the affirmative defense.

The decision to grant or deny leave to amend an answer is within the trial court’s discretion (Cohen and Karger, Powers of the New York Court of Appeals [rev ed], § 150, pp 595-596; 3 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac, par 3025.14). Since one of the purposes upon which the doctrine of collateral estoppel is premised is to conserve the resources of the courts and litigants (Gilberg v Barbieri, 53 NY2d 285, 291) and since defendants failed to move to amend their answer until plaintiff had presented nearly all his evidence, we cannot say, as a matter of law, that the trial court, in denying the motion, abused its discretion.

In view of defendants’ waiver of the defense of collateral estoppel, we need not pass on the question of the propriety of raising that defense under the circumstances present here.

We have also considered the evidentiary issues raised by defendants and find no basis for reversal.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

Related

Matter of Peters v. Caton Towers Owners Corp.
2024 NY Slip Op 33307(U) (New York Supreme Court, Kings County, 2024)
Encarnacion v. Irby
S.D. New York, 2024
Lennon v. 56th & Park(NY) Owner, LLC
2021 NY Slip Op 04972 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Country-Wide Insurance Co. v. Gotham Medical, P.C.
2017 NY Slip Op 7538 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Zhang Hua Lin v. Zhang Li Lin
52 Misc. 3d 229 (New York Supreme Court, 2016)
Country-Wide Insurance v. Gotham Medical, P.C.
50 Misc. 3d 712 (New York Supreme Court, 2015)
Sherwyn Toppin Marketing Consultants, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
103 A.D.3d 648 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Vanderpool v. Loftness
2012 COA 115 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 2012)
Ryan v. Kellogg Partners Institutional Services
79 A.D.3d 447 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Paterno v. Carroll
75 A.D.3d 625 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Simonds v. Kirkland
67 A.D.3d 1481 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Lindner v. Wilkerson
2 A.D.3d 500 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
DeLaurentis v. Nager
302 A.D.2d 486 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Guiliano v. Carlisle
296 A.D.2d 438 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
In re Hall
275 A.D.2d 979 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Capstone Enterprises of Port Chester, Inc. v. County of Westchester
272 A.D.2d 427 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Aponte v. Brentwood Union Free School District
270 A.D.2d 295 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Lane v. Beard
265 A.D.2d 382 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Chase Investments, Ltd. v. Kent
256 A.D.2d 298 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Konrad v. 136 East 64th Street Corp.
246 A.D.2d 324 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
444 N.E.2d 1323, 58 N.Y.2d 696, 458 N.Y.S.2d 904, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3916, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mayers-v-dagostino-ny-1982.