AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

Elizabeth Bonnen, etc., et al., appellants, v. Chin Hua Chiang, et al., respondents.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs' cross motion to amend their complaint and bill of particulars. While it is recognized that leave to amend a pleading may be freely granted (see, CPLR 3025[a]), leave should be denied as a matter of law where, as here, the proposed amendment is plainly lacking in merit (see, Parisi v. Leppard, 237 A.D.2d 419; McKiernan v. McKiernan, 207 A.D.2d 825). In addition, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment. Any failure by the defendants to maintain their premises was not a proximate cause of the infant plaintiff's injuries (see, Rizzi v. Scarsdale Leasing Corp., 223 A.D.2d 696).

MANGANO, P.J., SANTUCCI, KRAUSMAN, FLORIO and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BONNEN v. CHIN HUA CHIANG
(May 8, 2000)