From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pitsch v. Brevard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 16, 1966
25 A.D.2d 869 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)

Opinion

May 16, 1966


In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, defendant Brevard appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered November 29, 1965, as upon reargument adhered to a prior determination denying his motion to amend his answer so as to plead, as a defense, that plaintiff's remedy under the Workmen's Compensation Law is exclusive and a bar to this action. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, without costs, and motion to amend granted. The proposed amended answer printed in the papers on appeal shall be deemed defendant Brevard's amended answer, without further service thereof. Under the circumstances in this case and in view of the fact that no injury or prejudice is alleged by reason of appellant's delay in seeking to amend his answer, we are of the opinion that it was an improvident exercise of discretion on the part of the learned Special Term to deny him leave to serve the proposed amended answer ( Godell v. Greyhound Rent A Car, 24 A.D.2d 568; Greenspan v. Greenspan, 14 A.D.2d 910). Beldock, P.J., Ughetta, Brennan, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Pitsch v. Brevard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 16, 1966
25 A.D.2d 869 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)
Case details for

Pitsch v. Brevard

Case Details

Full title:RHEBA PITSCH, Respondent, v. EDWARD BREVARD, Appellant, and LOCKS…

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

Date published: May 16, 1966

Citations

25 A.D.2d 869 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)