Tanzi v. Tanzi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tanzi v. Tanzi

245 A.D.2d 500, 666 N.Y.S.2d 497, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13244

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

DecidedDecember 22, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 245 A.D.2d 500 (Tanzi v. Tanzi) 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

Tanzi v. Tanzi, 245 A.D.2d 500, 666 N.Y.S.2d 497, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13244 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an ac[501]*501tion, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract, the defendant Carlo Tanzi, Sr., appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), entered November 14, 1996, as granted the plaintiffs’ cross motion for leave to serve an amended complaint. In their brief on appeal, the plaintiffs make an application to strike pages 10 through 274 of the record on appeal.

Ordered that the application is granted (see, CPLR 5526), and pages 10 through 274 of the record are deemed stricken and have not been considered; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondents are awarded one bill of costs.

Leave to amend a complaint should be freely granted, unless the proposed amendment prejudices or surprises the opposing party, is palpably insufficient as a matter of law, or is totally devoid of merit (see, Del Bourgo v 138 Sidelines Corp., 208 AD2d 795). The amended complaint, which is based primarily upon the same transactions and occurrences as the original complaint, did not result in prejudice or surprise, and it cannot be said that the amendment is palpably insufficient as a matter of law or totally devoid of merit. Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and Lerner, JJ., concur.

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

—In an ac[501]*501tion, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract, the defendant Carlo Tanzi, Sr., appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), entered November 14, 1996, as granted the plaintiffs’ cross motion for leave to serve an amended complaint. In their brief on appeal, the plaintiffs make an application to strike pages 10 through 274 of the record on appeal.

Ordered that the application is granted (see, CPLR 5526), and pages 10 through 274 of the record are deemed stricken and have not been considered; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondents are awarded one bill of costs.

Leave to amend a complaint should be freely granted, unless the proposed amendment prejudices or surprises the opposing party, is palpably insufficient as a matter of law, or is totally devoid of merit (see, Del Bourgo v 138 Sidelines Corp., 208 AD2d 795). The amended complaint, which is based primarily upon the same transactions and occurrences as the original complaint, did not result in prejudice or surprise, and it cannot be said that the amendment is palpably insufficient as a matter of law or totally devoid of merit. Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and Lerner, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 A.D.2d 500, 666 N.Y.S.2d 497, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tanzi-v-tanzi-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack