Legal Opinion

Odell v. Dalrymple

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

Decided December 20, 1989PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and plaintiff’s motion denied. Memorandum: The court erred in granting plaintiff’s motion to amend his complaint to add a derivative claim on behalf of his wife. The tort claims are time barred because plaintiff’s wife was not a party to the action as commenced and the pleadings failed to give defendants notice that she would be asserting a claim (CPLR 203 [e]; see, Kettle v Sweet Home Cent. School Dist., 152 AD2d 956). With respect to the breach of contract claims, a derivative cause of action does not lie; claims for loss of consortium…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Gimenez v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1934
  2. Kettle v. Sweet Home Central School DistrictAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Riley v. Champion International Corp.District Court, E.D. Texas · 1997
  2. Perrin v. Hilton International, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1992
  3. Anderson v. CarneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  4. Dowdall v. General Motors Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  5. Anderson v. CarneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API