Legal Opinion
Hogarth v. City of Syracuse
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 25, 1997No. Appeal No. 1PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted the cross motion of plaintiff to amend her complaint to add a new cause of action alleging that the injuries sustained by plaintiff’s daughter were the result of the willful and intentional conduct of defendants. Leave to amend should be freely given (see, CPLR 3025 [b]), and the decision whether to grant such a motion is within the sound discretion of the court (see, Beuschel v Malm, 114 AD2d 569). Because the proposed amendment is not on its face palpably insufficient, we conclude that the court did not…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Bragg v. Genesee County Agricultural SocietyNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Beuschel v. MalmAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Prosser v. GouveiaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Clark v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Dean v. Glens Falls Country Club, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- DeBell v. Cousins, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Hogarth v. City of SyracuseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- MCGRATH, KAREN v. TOWN OF IRONDEQUOITAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012