Perez v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Perez v. City of New York

26 A.D.2d 541, 271 N.Y.S.2d 722, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3806

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

DecidedJune 30, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 26 A.D.2d 541 (Perez v. City of New York) 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

Perez v. City of New York, 26 A.D.2d 541, 271 N.Y.S.2d 722, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3806 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Order entered on August 27, 1965 unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, and leave is granted to defendant to serve an amended answer herein on condition that it first pays to plaintiff a full bill of costs to date, including $30 costs and disbursements of this appeal. Defendant in this wrongful death action seeks to amend its answer and include a defense based upon section 11 and subdivision 6 of section 29 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. While it is true that the defendant unduly delayed in the making of this motion, there has been no showing that the plaintiff would suffer any prejudice by granting defendant’s application. The plaintiff’s rights under the Workmen’s Compensation Law have been preserved by virtue of the filing by decedent’s first wife of a timely claim thereunder. (Matter of Whitsell v. Academy Auto Sales, 16 A D 2d 846.) The amended answer shall be served within 15 days of the entry of an order hereon. Concur — Stevens, J. P., Eager, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ.

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

Order entered on August 27, 1965 unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, and leave is granted to defendant to serve an amended answer herein on condition that it first pays to plaintiff a full bill of costs to date, including $30 costs and disbursements of this appeal. Defendant in this wrongful death action seeks to amend its answer and include a defense based upon section 11 and subdivision 6 of section 29 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. While it is true that the defendant unduly delayed in the making of this motion, there has been no showing that the plaintiff would suffer any prejudice by granting defendant’s application. The plaintiff’s rights under the Workmen’s Compensation Law have been preserved by virtue of the filing by decedent’s first wife of a timely claim thereunder. (Matter of Whitsell v. Academy Auto Sales, 16 A D 2d 846.) The amended answer shall be served within 15 days of the entry of an order hereon. Concur — Stevens, J. P., Eager, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 541, 271 N.Y.S.2d 722, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3806, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perez-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1966.