From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Manocchio v. Wohlfeil

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 15, 1994
206 A.D.2d 908 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

July 15, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Joslin, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Balio, Wesley and Davis, JJ.


Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs, motion granted, cross motion denied and complaint reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying plaintiffs' motion to amend the summons and complaint to reflect that "COUNTRY BREADS MORE, INC.," rather than "JOYCE WOHLFEIL D/B/A COUNTRY BREADS MORE" is the proper defendant. Such an amendment should be granted, even after the Statute of Limitations has run, "where (1) there is evidence that the correct defendant (misnamed in the original process) has in fact been properly served, and (2) the correct defendant would not be prejudiced by granting the amendment sought" (Ober v. Rye Town Hilton, 159 A.D.2d 16, 20; see also, Air Tite Mfg. v. Acropolis Assocs., 202 A.D.2d 1067; Simpson v. Kenston Warehousing Corp., 154 A.D.2d 526, 527). In this case, "`the misnomer could not possibly have misled the defendant concerning who it was that the plaintiff was in fact seeking to sue'" (Air Tite Mfg. v. Acropolis Assocs., supra, at 1067, quoting Creative Cabinet Corp. v. Future Visions Computer Store, 140 A.D.2d 483, 484-485; see also, Public Serv. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Joyce, 182 A.D.2d 535; Medina v. City of New York, 167 A.D.2d 268).


Summaries of

Manocchio v. Wohlfeil

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 15, 1994
206 A.D.2d 908 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Manocchio v. Wohlfeil

Case Details

Full title:MARY LOU MANOCCHIO et al., Appellants, v. JOYCE WOHLFEIL, Doing Business…

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

Date published: Jul 15, 1994

Citations

206 A.D.2d 908 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
614 N.Y.S.2d 837

Citing Cases

Rivera v. Beer Garden, Inc.

The original summons and complaint were timely filed. Leave to amend to correct defendant's name was properly…

Penrose v. Trojan Manufacturing Co., Inc.

A change to correct a mistake, such as a misnomer or an incorrect name of a defendant is an amendment, rather…