Legal Opinion
Rosenshein v. Rosenshein
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 1, 1990PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Defendant sought to amend his answer to assert a "reconciliation agreement” (captioned a "Pre-Nuptial” agreement), alleged to govern the division of the parties’ property, as a defense to plaintiff wife’s claim for equitable distribution. While leave to amend pleadings is freely given (CPLR 3025 [b]; Edenwald Contr. Co. v City of New York, 60 NY2d 957), Supreme Court’s denial of leave to amend was not an abuse of discretion in this instance. The IAS court had previously conducted an evidentiary hearing on an unrelated contempt motion, the transcript of which runs to nearly 100 pages.…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Edenwald Contracting Co. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- McGrath v. GoldNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- Thomas Crimmins Contracting Co. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
- Boorman v. DeutschAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Daniels v. Empire-Ore, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Lichtman v. Mount Judah CemeteryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Clearwater Realty Co. v. HernandezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Viacom International, Inc. v. Midtown Realty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Gee Tai Chong Realty Corp. v. GA InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Horan v. New York Telephone Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003