Opinion
15432N, 603613/08
06-16-2015
2470 CADILLAC RESOURCES, INC., et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, Bear Franchising (Connecticut), LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. DHL EXPRESS (USA), INC., Defendant–Respondent, Deutsche Post AG, Defendant.
Einbinder & Dunn, LLP, New York (Michael Einbinder of counsel), for appellants. Dechert LLP, New York (Edwin V. Woodsome of the bar of the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of California, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), for respondent.
Einbinder & Dunn, LLP, New York (Michael Einbinder of counsel), for appellants.
Dechert LLP, New York (Edwin V. Woodsome of the bar of the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of California, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), for respondent.
Opinion
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered on or about August 12, 2014, which denied plaintiffs-appellants' motion for leave to file a third amended complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying appellants' motion for leave to amend, as the proposed amendment is “palpably insufficient [and] clearly devoid of merit” (Perrotti v. Becker, Glynn, Melamed & Muffly LLP, 82 A.D.3d 495, 498, 918 N.Y.S.2d 423 [1st Dept.2011] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Eighth Ave. Garage Corp. v. H.K.L. Realty Corp., 60 A.D.3d 404, 875 N.Y.S.2d 8 [1st Dept.2009], lv. dismissed 12 N.Y.3d 880, 883 N.Y.S.2d 174, 910 N.E.2d 1003 [2009] ). Seven years after initiating this action, appellants seek to assert three new claims for breach of implied contracts to continue to resell shipping services without any factual basis. The deposition testimony cited by appellants does not support their new claims.
We have considered appellants' remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
MAZZARELLI, J.P., SWEENY, ANDRIAS, SAXE, RICHTER, JJ., concur.