Pogue v. Del Rosario

266 A.D.2d 525, 698 N.Y.S.2d 898, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12279
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 29, 1999
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 266 A.D.2d 525 (Pogue v. Del Rosario) 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
Pogue v. Del Rosario, 266 A.D.2d 525, 698 N.Y.S.2d 898, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12279 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Opinion

—In an action to recover dam[526]*526ages for medical malpractice, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Jones, J.), dated July 13, 1998, which denied their motion for leave to serve and file an amended answer asserting the affirmative defense of failure to mitigate damages.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The decision to grant or deny leave to amend a pleading is within the court’s discretion, and the exercise of such discretion will not be lightly disturbed (see, Sherman v Claire Mfg. Co., 239 AD2d 487). In this case the defendants did not seek leave to amend the answer in a timely manner, failed to proffer any reasonable excuse for the delay (see, Romeo v Arrigo, 254 AD2d 270), and did not proffer an adequate showing of merit (see, Bertan v Richmond Mem. Hosp. & Health Ctr., 106 AD2d 362). Accordingly, the denial of their motion was not an improvident exercise of discretion. Bracken, J. P., Friedmann, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

Related

ALD Holding Corp. v. F & O Port Corp.
15 A.D.3d 508 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Miglio v. Schildbach
303 A.D.2d 470 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Travelers Property Casualty v. Powell
289 A.D.2d 564 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Francisco v. 201 Saw Mill River Road Development Corp.
289 A.D.2d 374 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
266 A.D.2d 525, 698 N.Y.S.2d 898, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12279, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pogue-v-del-rosario-nyappdiv-1999.