From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Blaikie v. Borden Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 18, 1968
29 A.D.2d 932 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)

Opinion

April 18, 1968


Order, entered on June 2, 1967, granting motion by plaintiff for leave to replead his individual cause of action and directing service of his amended complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $30 costs and disbursements to appellant, the motion denied and the amended complaint dismissed. Leave to replead further is denied. Still unremedied, in our opinion, are the deficiencies which were noted in connection with the original complaint (see 27 A.D.2d 804). The affidavit by plaintiff which is now included in the record falls short of meeting the requirement that "there must be some evidentiary showing that the claim can be supported" ( Cushman Wakefield v. John David, Inc., 25 A.D.2d 133, 135), indeed so far short that no further attempt to replead may be countenanced.

Concur — Botein, P.J., Stevens, Steuer, Capozzoli and McNally, JJ.


Summaries of

Blaikie v. Borden Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 18, 1968
29 A.D.2d 932 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)
Case details for

Blaikie v. Borden Co.

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT B. BLAIKIE, Respondent, v. BORDEN CO. et al., Defendants, and…

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

Date published: Apr 18, 1968

Citations

29 A.D.2d 932 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)

Citing Cases

Iorio v. City of New York

(4 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N Y Civ Prac, par 3212.05; Souveran Fabrics Corp. v Virginia Fibre Corp., 37 A.D.2d…

Hrusko v. Public Service Coordinated Transp

The amendment is without basis in fact. (See Blaikie v. Borden Co., 29 A.D.2d 932.) The relief granted is…