Opinion
570486/09.
Decided January 19, 2010.
Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Joan M. Kenney, J.), entered on or about May 14, 2009, which denied its motion for leave to amend its complaint.
PRESENT: Schoenfeld, J.P., Shulman, Hunter, JJ.
Order (Joan M. Kenney, J.), entered on or about May 14, 2009, reversed, without costs, plaintiff's motion for leave to amend granted, and the proposed amended complaint deemed served.
Leave to amend pleadings should be freely given, absent a showing of prejudice or surprise ( see CPLR 3025[b]; Edenwald Contr. Co. v City of New York, 60 NY2d 957, 959). Here, leave should have been granted since plaintiff merely sought to correct minor errors in its complaint regarding the months it claimed defendant had failed to pay rent ( see generally First Sealord Sur., Inc. v Vesta 24 LLC, 55 AD3d 423). Notably, plaintiff did not add a new cause of action or increase the amount of the ad damnum clause. Therefore, plaintiff's unopposed motion, seeking relief not prejudicial to defendant, should have been granted.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT