From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Napolitano v. Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 30, 1998
255 A.D.2d 567 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

November 30, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Coppola, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Under the particular circumstances of this case, which involve a construction site accident wherein a worker fell through an opening in the floor injuring himself, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting the plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend the complaint to add a cause of action pursuant to Labor Law § 240 Lab. (1). Significantly, the appellant was unable to demonstrate any prejudice or surprise by the delay in moving for leave, to amend ( see, Corsale v. Pantry Pride Supermarket, 197 A.D.2d 659; D'Onofrio v. St. Joseph's Hosp. Health Ctr., 101 A.D.2d 686). Moreover, contrary to "the appellant's contention, a prior order by Justice Golabella did not preclude the granting of the plaintiffs' motion under the doctrine of law of the case.

O'Brien, J. P., Pizzuto, Joy and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Napolitano v. Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 30, 1998
255 A.D.2d 567 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Napolitano v. Corp.

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH NAPOLITANO et al., Respondents, v. DGM-I CORPORATION, Appellant, et…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 30, 1998

Citations

255 A.D.2d 567 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
681 N.Y.S.2d 92

Citing Cases

Tsachalis v. City of Mount Vernon

The plaintiff did not provide a reasonable excuse for his delay in seeking to amend the bill of particulars…

McMahon v. 42nd St. Development Project, Inc.

Consequently any error by plaintiff in failing to specify a violation of Labor law 240(2) is both…