Legal Opinion

Taylor v. Village of Ilion

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided September 27, 1996PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed with costs to plaintiff in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting defendant’s motion for leave to serve a second amended answer. It is well settled that, absent surprise or prejudice, leave to amend pleadings is to be "freely given” (CPLR 3025 [b]) and that the determination whether to grant leave to amend is a matter addressed in the first instance to the discretion of the trial court {see, Edenwald Contr. Co. v City of New York, 60 NY2d 957, 959; Faracy v McGraw…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Edenwald Contracting Co. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  2. Faracy v. McGraw Edison Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  3. Wirhowski v. Hudson Armored Car & Courier Service, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Taylor v. Village of IlionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API