From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

LOADHOLT v. RAMS BEER SODA, INC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 26, 2000
273 A.D.2d 446 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Submitted May 16, 2000.

July 26, 2000.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (G. Aronin, J.), entered May 27, 1999, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $100,000.

McCabe, Collins, McGeough Fowler, LLP, Mineola, N.Y. (Patrick M. Murphy of counsel), for appellants.

Rubenstein Rynecki, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Ronald J. Aiello of counsel), for respondent.

Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, ANITA R. FLORIO, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants argue that the Supreme Court abused its discretion in permitting, inter alia, evidence of injury to the plaintiff's left knee despite the fact that no such injury was indicated in the bill of particulars. However, "leave to amend a bill of particulars is ordinarily to be freely given in the absence of prejudice or surprise" (Kyong Hi Wohn v. County of Suffolk, 237 A.D.2d 412). There was no showing of prejudice or surprise, and the determination constituted a provident exercise of discretion (see, Kyong Hi Wohn v. County of Suffolk, supra).

The defendants' remaining contentions are without merit.


Summaries of

LOADHOLT v. RAMS BEER SODA, INC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 26, 2000
273 A.D.2d 446 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

LOADHOLT v. RAMS BEER SODA, INC

Case Details

Full title:RONALD LOADHOLT, RESPONDENT, v. RAMS BEER SODA, INC., ET AL., APPELLANTS

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

Date published: Jul 26, 2000

Citations

273 A.D.2d 446 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
712 N.Y.S.2d 364

Citing Cases

Smith v. Zargaroff

The proposed amendment, which seeks only to add an additional theory of recovery based upon the facts already…

Jones v. Lynch

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the plaintiff leave to serve a second…