From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tricarico v. B B Equipment Co., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 6, 1998
249 A.D.2d 296 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

April 6, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Hall, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Given the length of the appellant's delay in moving to amend its answer, its failure to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay, the prejudice the proposed amendment would cause the plaintiffs, and the apparent lack of merit of the proposed amendment, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the appellant's motion (see, Matter of Goggins, 231 A.D.2d 634).

O'Brien, J.P., Ritter, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Tricarico v. B B Equipment Co., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 6, 1998
249 A.D.2d 296 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Tricarico v. B B Equipment Co., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:FRANK TRICARICO et al., Respondents, v. B B EQUIPMENT CO., INC.…

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

Date published: Apr 6, 1998

Citations

249 A.D.2d 296 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
671 N.Y.S.2d 299

Citing Cases

Greenstone Roberts Advertising, Inc. v. Bernard Hodes Advertising, Inc.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs. Given the length of the defendants' delay in moving to amend…