White v. City of Mount Vernon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

White v. City of Mount Vernon

38 A.D.3d 533, 831 N.Y.S.2d 324

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

DecidedMarch 6, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 38 A.D.3d 533 (White v. City of Mount Vernon) 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

White v. City of Mount Vernon, 38 A.D.3d 533, 831 N.Y.S.2d 324 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for civil rights violations pursuant to 42 USCA § 1983, the defendant City of Mount Vernon appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Smith, J.), dated July 6, 2006, which granted the plaintiffs motion for leave to amend the complaint to substitute the true names of the defendants John Does I through III.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

“The determination whether to grant leave to amend a pleading is within the court’s discretion, and the exercise of that discretion will not lightly be disturbed” (AFBT-II, LLC v [534]*534Country Vil. on Mooney Pond, Inc., 21 AD3d 972, 972 [2005]; see CPLR 1024, 3025 [b]). Under the facts of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the plaintiff’s motion (see Rezniek v MTA/Long Is. Bus, 7 AD3d 773, 774 [2004]; Mangan v White Plains Hosp. Med. Ctr., 136 AD2d 608 [1988]; Gottlieb v County of Nassau, 92 AD2d 858 [1983]).

The appellant’s claim that the plaintiffs motion should have been denied as time-barred is without merit (see Rezniek v MTA/ Long Is. Bus, supra). Rivera, J.E, Spolzino, Fisher, Lifson and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for civil rights violations pursuant to 42 USCA § 1983, the defendant City of Mount Vernon appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Smith, J.), dated July 6, 2006, which granted the plaintiffs motion for leave to amend the complaint to substitute the true names of the defendants John Does I through III.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

“The determination whether to grant leave to amend a pleading is within the court’s discretion, and the exercise of that discretion will not lightly be disturbed” (AFBT-II, LLC v [534]*534Country Vil. on Mooney Pond, Inc., 21 AD3d 972, 972 [2005]; see CPLR 1024, 3025 [b]). Under the facts of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the plaintiff’s motion (see Rezniek v MTA/Long Is. Bus, 7 AD3d 773, 774 [2004]; Mangan v White Plains Hosp. Med. Ctr., 136 AD2d 608 [1988]; Gottlieb v County of Nassau, 92 AD2d 858 [1983]).

The appellant’s claim that the plaintiffs motion should have been denied as time-barred is without merit (see Rezniek v MTA/ Long Is. Bus, supra). Rivera, J.E, Spolzino, Fisher, Lifson and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.3d 533, 831 N.Y.S.2d 324, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/white-v-city-of-mount-vernon-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack