Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Powell v. Mulcahy

Powell v. Mulcahy

99 A.D.2d 653, 472 N.Y.S.2d 63, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16903
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 27, 1984
StatusPublished

This text of 99 A.D.2d 653 (Powell v. Mulcahy) 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
Powell v. Mulcahy, 99 A.D.2d 653, 472 N.Y.S.2d 63, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16903 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinion

Order unanimously modified, and, as modified, affirmed, with costs to plaintiff, in accordance with the following memorandum: Special Term properly granted plaintiff leave to increase the ad damnum clause in her complaint (see Loomis v Civetta Corinno Constr. Corp., 54 NY2d 18; Kenford Co. v County of Erie, 93 AD2d 998; Stornelli v Aakron Rule Corp., 89 AD2d 1060). The court erred in refusing to allow the plaintiff to amend her verified bill of particulars to allege additional negligence as set forth in article 25-B of the General Business Law (see Miller v Albany Med. Center Hasp., 95 AD2d 977; Bronson v Potsdam Urban Renewal Agency, 74 AD2d 967; Rife v Union Coll., 30 AD2d 504). Leave to amend should be freely given in the absence of surprise or prejudice (CPLR 3025, subd [b]; Fahey v County of Ontario, 44 NY2d 934). (Appeals from order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Inglehart, J. — ad damnum clause.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Doerr, Green, O’Donnell and Moule, JJ.

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

Related

Loomis v. Civetta Corinno Construction Corp.
429 N.E.2d 90 (New York Court of Appeals, 1981)
Rife v. Union College
30 A.D.2d 504 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1968)
Bronson v. Potsdam Urban Renewal Agency
74 A.D.2d 967 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)
Stornelli v. Aakron Rule Corp.
89 A.D.2d 1060 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
Kenford Co. v. County of Erie
93 A.D.2d 998 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)
Miller v. Albany Medical Center Hospital
95 A.D.2d 977 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
99 A.D.2d 653, 472 N.Y.S.2d 63, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/powell-v-mulcahy-nyappdiv-1984.