Sheingold v. Behrens
This text of 275 A.D.2d 671 (Sheingold v. Behrens) 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.
Opinion
The plaintiff was a social visitor and not a licensee. (Roth v. Prudential Life Ins. Co. of America, 266 App. Div. 872; Comeau V. Comeau, 285 Mass. 578; Restatement, Torts, §§ 331, 332.) Order denying plaintiff’s motion for permission to serve a second amended complaint unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. There was no abuse of discretion in the refusal to permit plaintiff to serve a second amended complaint alleging matters purely of evidence. Present — Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Wenzel and MaeCrate, JJ. [See post, pp. 686, 710, 770.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
275 A.D.2d 671, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sheingold-v-behrens-nyappdiv-1949.