From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Palau v. Larson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 15, 2011
81 A.D.3d 799 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

No. 2010-06882.

February 15, 2011.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant George Larson appeals, as limited by his brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lane, J.), dated June 4, 2010, which, inter alia, granted that branch of the plaintiffs cross motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3025 (b) for leave to amend the complaint to allege a cause of action based on detrimental reliance.

Lewis Johs Avallone Aviles, LLP, Melville, N.Y. (Thomas J. Dargan and Michael G. Kruzynski of counsel), for appellant.

Taubman Kimelman Soroka, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Antonette M. Milcetic of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Dillon, J.P., Covello, Florio and Hall, JJ.


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting that branch of the plaintiffs cross motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3025 (b) for leave to amend the complaint to allege a cause of action based on his detrimental reliance on the appellant's "continued performance of [its] duties" ( Espinal v Melville Snow Contrs., 98 NY2d 136, 140), as the proposed amendment would not cause prejudice or surprise and was neither palpably insufficient nor patently devoid of merit ( see CPLR 3025 [b]; see generally Botros v Flamm, 77 AD3d 602, 602-603).

In light of the foregoing, we need not reach the appellant's remaining contentions.


Summaries of

Palau v. Larson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 15, 2011
81 A.D.3d 799 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

Palau v. Larson

Case Details

Full title:MIGUEL PALAU, Respondent, v. GEORGE LARSON, Appellant, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Feb 15, 2011

Citations

81 A.D.3d 799 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 1254
916 N.Y.S.2d 808

Citing Cases

Keating v. Town of Oyster Bay

The decision to grant or deny leave to amend is committed to the court's discretion, and mere lateness is…