From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rochester Poster Advert. v. Town of Penfield

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 20, 1976
51 A.D.2d 870 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Opinion

February 20, 1976

Appeal from the Monroe Supreme Court.

Present — Marsh, P.J., Moule, Simons, Mahoney and Goldman, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an order of the Monroe County Supreme Court which permitted plaintiff to amend the complaint after the original pleading was dismissed pursuant to CPLR 3211 (subd [a]). Although at the time of defendant's motion under CPLR 3211 (subd [a]), plaintiff did not request leave to replead as mandated by CPLR 3211 (subd [e]) that failure does not require reversal of the order (CPLR 3025, subd [b]; VanMinos v Merkley, 48 A.D.2d 281). Furthermore, while the court dismissed plaintiff's original complaint "on the merits," that dismissal does not constitute a final determination of the case, since on appeal from that decision, we specifically limited our affirmance of the dismissal to plaintiff's failure to plead an essential element of the cause of action (Rochester Poster Advertising Co. v Town of Penfield, 46 A.D.2d 726). Defendant's argument that the action has become moot is without merit since the purpose behind plaintiff's suit is to challenge the constitutionality of defendant's ordinance.


Summaries of

Rochester Poster Advert. v. Town of Penfield

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 20, 1976
51 A.D.2d 870 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)
Case details for

Rochester Poster Advert. v. Town of Penfield

Case Details

Full title:ROCHESTER POSTER ADVERTISING Co., INC., Respondent, v. TOWN OF PENFIELD…

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

Date published: Feb 20, 1976

Citations

51 A.D.2d 870 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Citing Cases

Cullen v. New York State Civil Serv. Comn.

Under this rather harsh rule, to obtain leave to amend a party must make a request in the original pleading…

Atkins Nutritionals, Inc. v. Ernst Young LLP

Therefore, the plaintiff should have made an application before the Appellate Division. The case relied upon…