From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coerbell v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 6, 1987
132 A.D.2d 514 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

July 6, 1987

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Duberstein, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Our review of the record discloses that the court properly exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion for leave to serve an amended complaint increasing the ad damnum clause and to transfer the case from the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, to the Supreme Court, Kings County. In order to establish entitlement to that relief, the plaintiff's motion papers must demonstrate the merits of the case, the reasons for the delay, and that the increase is warranted by reason of facts which had recently come to the plaintiff's attention (see, Dolan v. Garden City Union Free School Dist., 113 A.D.2d 781, 784-785). Secondly, the motion papers must include a physician's affidavit or affirmation establishing "a causal connection between the injury and a consistent course of treatment for accident-caused injuries" (Dolan v. Garden City Union Free School Dist., supra, at 785).

At bar, the alleged exacerbation of the plaintiff's injuries, for which the instant relief is requested, occurred approximately two years prior to plaintiff's motion. Moreover, several months after the plaintiff allegedly suffered this deterioration in condition, his attorneys stipulated to transfer the case from the Supreme Court to the Civil Court and to decrease the ad damnum clause from $100,000 to $25,000. The only excuse offered by the plaintiff for his execution of the stipulation and for the subsequent delay in making the present application is that he failed to communicate with his attorneys during the period in question.

In view of the foregoing, it is apparent that the plaintiff has failed to establish that the increase is warranted by facts which have recently come to his attention (see, Martin v. Maimonides Med. Center, 125 A.D.2d 455). In any event, the plaintiff has established no grounds upon which he would be entitled to relief from the terms of the stipulation by which he specifically agreed to transfer the case to the Civil Court and to decrease the ad damnum clause. Rubin, J.P., Kooper, Spatt and Harwood, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Coerbell v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 6, 1987
132 A.D.2d 514 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

Coerbell v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:NEVILLE COERBELL, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendant and…

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

Date published: Jul 6, 1987

Citations

132 A.D.2d 514 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

Sylvester v. Stephens

Nor did the papers contain an affidavit setting forth a reasonable explanation for the plaintiffs' delay in…

Sirju v. New York City Transit Authority

Contrary to the defendant's contention, this appeal is procedurally proper, inasmuch as it is an appeal from…