From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Herbert F. Darling, Inc. v. Contegra Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 9, 1995
216 A.D.2d 962 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

June 9, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Joslin, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Pine, Callahan and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The record establishes that Supreme Court properly granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the second cause of action for an account stated (see, 1 N.Y. Jur 2d, Accounts and Accounting, § 19; see also, Trager Glass Co. v. Statbrook Contr. Corp., 197 A.D.2d 476; Marino v. Watkins, 112 A.D.2d 511, 512-513; cf., Peterson v. IBJ Schroder Bank Trust Co., 172 A.D.2d 165). Further, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's cross motion for leave to amend the answer to assert a counterclaim against plaintiff. Defendant knew of the facts that form the basis of the proposed amendment before it interposed its original answer, yet it waited, without explanation, until it was faced with plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the second cause of action before seeking to interpose the counterclaim (see, Leon v. Montano, 119 A.D.2d 553).


Summaries of

Herbert F. Darling, Inc. v. Contegra Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 9, 1995
216 A.D.2d 962 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Herbert F. Darling, Inc. v. Contegra Corp.

Case Details

Full title:HERBERT F. DARLING, INC., Respondent, v. CONTEGRA CORPORATION, Appellant

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

Date published: Jun 9, 1995

Citations

216 A.D.2d 962 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
629 N.Y.S.2d 714