From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rocioppi v. Bay Club, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 22, 2004
5 A.D.3d 656 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2003-04242.

Decided March 22, 2004.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants, Bay Club, Inc., Bay Club Condominiums, and the City of New York appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), dated March 28, 2003, which granted the plaintiff's motion for leave to amend his complaint to add a cause of action alleging breach of contract and denied their cross motion to dismiss any cause of action to recover damages for breach of contract.

Greater New York Mutual Insurance Company, New York, N.Y. (Thomas D. Hughes, Alvin P. Bluthman, and Richard C. Rubinstein of counsel), for appellants.

Goldblatt Associates, New York, N.Y. (Kenneth B. Goldblatt of counsel), for respondent.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is modified, on the law, by (1) deleting the provision thereof granting the motion and substituting therefor a provision denying the motion, and (2) adding thereto the words "as unnecessary" following the words "Defendant's cross motion is denied"; as so modified, the order is affirmed, with costs to the appellants.

Leave to amend a pleading should be freely granted absent a showing of prejudice resulting from the delay and provided that the proposed amendment is not plainly lacking in merit ( see CPLR 3025[b]; Monello v. Sottile, Megna, 281 A.D.2d 463). In this case, the plaintiff failed to satisfy the standard. Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, he could not assert a cause of action to recover damages for breach of contract against Bay Club Condominiums and the City of New York as a third-party beneficiary of the contract between those parties since the record is devoid of any evidence that they intended that the plaintiff be a beneficiary of the contract ( see Amin Realty v. K R Constr. Corp., 306 A.D.2d 230, lv denied 100 N.Y.2d 515).

SANTUCCI, J.P., SMITH, LUCIANO and ADAMS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Rocioppi v. Bay Club, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 22, 2004
5 A.D.3d 656 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Rocioppi v. Bay Club, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:CARMINE ROCIOPPI, respondent, v. BAY CLUB, INC., ET AL., appellants, ET…

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

Date published: Mar 22, 2004

Citations

5 A.D.3d 656 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
774 N.Y.S.2d 735

Citing Cases

Techcon Contr., Inc. v. Village of Lynbrook

See also, Ruby Land Development Ltd. v. Toussie, 4 A.D. 3d 518 [2nd Dept. 2004]), unless the proposed…