Milkis v. Condominium Lloyd 54 Condominium
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
1Opinion of the Court
*57OPINION OF THE COURT
2Per curiam
Order, entered February 25, 2008, affirmed, with $10 costs.
The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendants’ belated motion to amend their answer. Although permission to amend should ordinarily be freely granted (CPLR 3025 [b]), the movant must make some evidentiary showing that the proposed amendment has arguable merit (see HeleneHarrisson Corp. v Moneyline Networks, 6 AD3d 151 [2004]). The proposed counterclaims advanced by defendants herein assert that the plaintiff mother failed to adequately “interfere with” — or, perhaps more properly, to take steps…
3Cases cited4 opinions
- Holodook v. SpencerNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Alharb v. SayeghAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Cooper v. County of RensselaerNew York Supreme Court · 1999
- Helene-Harrisson Corp. v. Moneyline Networks, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004