From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Alaska Seaboard Partners v. Low

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 6, 2002
294 A.D.2d 318 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-01468, 2001-01469

Submitted April 2, 2002.

May 6, 2002.

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Charles L. Low appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Hickman, J.), dated December 15, 2000, which granted the plaintiff's motion to amend the caption to reflect that Alaska Seaboard Partners, LP, is the proper plaintiff and denied his cross motion, inter alia, to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against him as time-barred, and (2) an order of the same court, dated January 8, 2001, which granted the plaintiff's motion to amend the caption to reflect that Alaska Seaboard Partners, LP, is the proper plaintiff and allowed the plaintiff to serve an amended complaint upon him by mail.

Daniels Porco, LLP, Carmel, N.Y. (Robert C. Lusardi of counsel), for appellant.

Knuckles Komosinski, P.C., White Plains, N.Y. (Mark R. Knuckles of counsel), for respondent.

Before: RITTER, J.P., ALTMAN, ADAMS, CRANE, JJ.


ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order dated December 15, 2000, as granted the plaintiff's motion to amend the caption is dismissed as superseded by the order dated January 8, 2001; and it is further,

ORDERED that the order dated December 15, 2000, is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the order dated January 8, 2001, is affirmed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the plaintiff is awarded one bill of costs.

Contrary to the appellant's contention, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the plaintiff's motion to amend the caption, as there was no showing that the appellant was prejudiced by the delay in bringing the motion (cf. Macomber v. Cipollina, 226 A.D.2d 435, 437; Egrini v. Brookhaven Mem. Hosp., 133 A.D.2d 610; Milam v. Gibson Cushman of N.Y., 81 A.D.2d 555, 556).

The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.

RITTER, J.P., ALTMAN, ADAMS and CRANE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Alaska Seaboard Partners v. Low

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 6, 2002
294 A.D.2d 318 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Alaska Seaboard Partners v. Low

Case Details

Full title:ALASKA SEABOARD PARTNERS, LP, respondent, v. CHARLES L. LOW, appellant, et…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 6, 2002

Citations

294 A.D.2d 318 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
741 N.Y.S.2d 881

Citing Cases

Muco v. Sadiku

The branch of plaintiffs' application seeking to amend the complaint and the caption on the pleadings to…

U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Deochand

Furthermore, plaintiff demonstrated that the amendment of the caption is warranted and that defendants would…