McKiernan v. McKiernan
| Decision Date | 19 September 1994 |
| Citation | 616 N.Y.S.2d 629,207 A.D.2d 825 |
| Parties | Peter McKIERNAN, Appellant, v. Mary A. McKIERNAN, Respondent, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Rolf H.G. Sandvoss, Mount Kisco, for appellant.
Bleakley Platt & Schmidt, White Plains (William P. Harrington and John F. Martin, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MANGANO, P.J., and BRACKEN, SANTUCCI and FRIEDMANN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In an action for the partition of marital property, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Donovan, J.), entered March 17, 1992, as denied his application for leave to amend the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
In determining whether to grant leave to amend a pleading, a court must examine the underlying merit of the causes of action asserted therein, since to do otherwise would be wasteful of judicial resources (see, Wieder v. Skala, 168 A.D.2d 355, 563 N.Y.S.2d 76). Although leave to amend a pleading is liberally granted, where, as here, the proposed amendment is patently lacking in merit, it will not be permitted and leave should be denied as a matter of law (see, Staines v. Nassau Queens Med. Group, 176 A.D.2d 718, 574 N.Y.S.2d 800; Hauptman v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 162 A.D.2d 588, 556 N.Y.S.2d 929).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Askenazi v. Hymil Mfg. Co., Inc.
...be denied where the proposed amendment is totally devoid of merit or is palpably insufficient as a matter of law (McKiernan v. McKiernan, 207 A.D.2d 825, 616 N.Y.S.2d 629; Staines v. Nassau Queens Med. Group, 176 A.D.2d 718, 574 N.Y.S.2d 800; Hauptman v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.,......
-
International Fidelity Ins. Co. v. Gaco Western, Inc.
...McCaskey, Davies & Assocs. v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 59 N.Y.2d 755, 463 N.Y.S.2d 434, 450 N.E.2d 240; McKiernan v. McKiernan, 207 A.D.2d 825, 616 N.Y.S.2d 629). We find no merit to the parties' remaining ...
-
Castro v. Fermin
...consider the merits of the proposed amended pleading (see, Morgan v. Prospect Park Associates Holdings, LP, 251 A.D.2d 306 ; McKiernan v.. McKiernan, 207 A.D.2d 825 ), and the court has done so by applying the defendants' CPLR 3211(a)(7) motion to the proposed amended complaint. This has re......
-
Prendergast v. Kingston City School Dist.
...634 N.Y.S.2d 880, quoting Sabol & Rice v. Poughkeepsie Galleria Co., 175 A.D.2d 555, 556, 572 N.Y.S.2d 811; see, McKiernan v. McKiernan, 207 A.D.2d 825, 616 N.Y.S.2d 629; Bombard v. Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Co., 205 A.D.2d 1018, 1019, 614 N.Y.S.2d 577, lv dismissed84 N.Y.2d 923, 621 N.Y.S......