From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sherman v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 19, 1968
29 A.D.2d 775 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)

Opinion

February 19, 1968


Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 5, 1967, which denied appellant's motion to amend its answer so as to deny the allegations in paragraph "Eleventh" of the complaint, which are that appellant was the general contractor of the construction job in question. Order reversed, without costs, and motion granted. Appellant may serve an amended answer in accordance herewith within 20 days after entry of the order hereon. However, in the interests of justice, plaintiff is granted leave to pursue such further pretrial proceedings as he deems advisable. The omission to make the denial in question in appellant's answer was because of inadvertence. Plaintiff has not been prejudiced ( Kane v. Long Is. Jewish Hosp., 29 A.D.2d 554; La Bate v. Meyerbank Elec. Co., 23 A.D.2d 503). Beldock, P.J., Brennan, Rabin, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Sherman v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 19, 1968
29 A.D.2d 775 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)
Case details for

Sherman v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:MOE SHERMAN, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Defendants, and…

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

Date published: Feb 19, 1968

Citations

29 A.D.2d 775 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)

Citing Cases

Keenan v. Bruce

In our opinion, the omission to make the denials in question was excusable. Plaintiff has not demonstrated…