Norton v. Norton
| Decision Date | 23 February 1961 |
| Citation | 211 N.Y.S.2d 458,12 A.D.2d 1003 |
| Parties | Florence K. NORTON, Appellant, v. Lloyd NORTON, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Hyman G. Gould, Rochester, for appellant.
W. Earle Costello, Corning, for respondent.
Before WILLIAMS, P. J., and BASTOW, GOLDMAN, HALPERN and McCLUSKY, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
This action is one for divorce. The order granted upon this motion permitted the defendant to amend his answer to plead a counterclaim attacking the validity of a judgment of annulment of a former marriage of the plaintiff. The proposed counterclaim was palpably insufficient on its face. Arcuri v. Arcuri, 265 N.Y. 358, 193 N.E. 174.
Order insofar as appealed from unanimously reversed with twenty-five dollars costs and disbursements and motion for leave to amend denied with ten dollars costs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
10 cases
-
Beverage Mktg. USA v. South Beach Beverage Co., 2004 NY Slip Op 50235(U) (NY 4/5/2004)
...the proposed amendment is so meritless as to have no chance of success. Siegel, New York Practice 3rd §237. See also, Norton v. Norton, 12 A.D.2d 1003 (4th Dept.1961); and B v. B, 78 Misc.2d 112 (Sup. Ct., Kings Co., In this case, as a matter of law, the proposed amendment to the sixth caus......
-
B v. B
...insufficient or immaterial the court need not exercise its discretion affirmatively; and leave should be denied (Norton v. Norton, 12 A.D.2d 1003, 211 N.Y.S.2d 458; McGrath v. City of New York, Sup., 191 N.Y.S.2d 993). Generally, the inquiry is limited to the propriety of the amendment, not......
-
Cadran v. Fanni
...Dolce, 11 A.D.2d 1079, 206 N.Y.S.2d 193), that is, of course, unless the insufficiency is clear and free from doubt. In Norton v. Norton, 12 A.D.2d 1003, 211 N.Y.S.2d 458 the Appellate Division in the Fourth Department reversed a lower court order permitting amendment to add a counterclaim ......
-
Bellefeuille v. City and County Sav. Bank of City of Albany
...proposed amendment is palpably insufficient on its face, leave to amend the answer so as to plead it should be denied. (Norton v. Norton, 12 A.D.2d 1003, 211 N.Y.S.2d 458; Lo Verde v. Four Sixty-Nine Realty Corp., Sup., 47 N.Y.S.2d 859, aff'd 269 App.Div. 692, 54 N.Y.S.2d 391, aff'd 295 N.Y......
Request a trial to view additional results