FIDELITY HOLDINGS v. MAROM

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

The defendants cross-moved for leave to amend their answer and to interpose eleven counterclaims, of which the fourth, sixth, ninth, tenth, and eleventh included demands for punitive damages. The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting those branches of the cross motion which were for leave to amend the answer and to interpose ten of those counterclaims, specifically the first through the fifth and the seventh through the eleventh. In the absence of surprise or prejudice resulting from the delay, leave to amend pleadings shall be given freely (see, CPLR 3025[b]; McCaskey, Davies Assocs. v. New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 59 N.Y.2d 755; Sharon Ava Co. v. Olympic Tower Assocs., 259 A.D.2d 315). In addition, the proposed fourth, ninth, tenth, and eleventh counterclaims sufficiently set forth claims for punitive damages (see, Suffolk Sports Ctr. v. Belli Constr. Corp., 212 A.D.2d 241; Werner, Zarof, Slotnick, Stern Askenazy v. Lewis, 155 Misc.2d 558).

The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit.