From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Farrell v. K.J.D.E. Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 19, 1997
244 A.D.2d 905 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

November 19, 1997

(Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Tormey, J. — Amended Complaint.)

Present — Denman, P. J., Pine, Wisner, Balio and Boehm, JJ.


Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with following Memorandum: Supreme Court properly permitted plaintiff to amend the complaint to state causes of action for breach of contract and unjust enrichment. The court erred, however, in granting plaintiff leave to amend the complaint to assert causes of action for rescission, fraud and punitive damages. "It is incumbent upon one seeking leave to amend a pleading to make an evidentiary showing that the claim can be supported" ( Sober v. Kalina, 208 A.D.2d 1140; see, Tenenbaum v. Long Beach Mem. Hosp., 206 A.D.2d 973). Although plaintiff did not submit an affidavit of merit in support of the motion, the proposed verified complaint supplies the requisite evidentiary support for the proposed causes of action for breach of contract and unjust enrichment ( see, CPLR 105 [u]; Salch v. Paratore, 60 N.Y.2d 851, 852-853, rearg denied 61 N.Y.2d 759). Furthermore, "[m]ere lateness is not a barrier to the amendment" (Siegel, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of N.Y., Book 7B, CPLR C3025:5, at 356), and defendant failed to show prejudice. Plaintiff, however, has provided no evidentiary support for the allegations of fraud underlying the causes of action for rescission and fraud. There are references in an attorney's affidavit to an expert's report and the allegedly corroborative testimony of a former employee of defendant, but there is no affidavit from either individual. There is no separate cause of action for punitive damages ( see, Anderson v. WHEC-TV [appeal No. 2], 92 A.D.2d 747, 748).

We further conclude that the court properly denied the cross motion of defendant for partial summary judgment on its counterclaim ( see, Burgess Steel Prods. Corp. v. Modern Telecommunications, 205 A.D.2d 344, 346). We modify the order, therefore, by denying that part of plaintiff's motion seeking leave to amend the complaint to assert causes of action for rescission, fraud and punitive damages.


Summaries of

Farrell v. K.J.D.E. Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 19, 1997
244 A.D.2d 905 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Farrell v. K.J.D.E. Corp.

Case Details

Full title:ANDREW FARRELL, Individually and Doing Business as BASIC SOLUTIONS…

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

Date published: Nov 19, 1997

Citations

244 A.D.2d 905 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
665 N.Y.S.2d 201

Citing Cases

Sharf v. PRL Equity Group

Furthermore, there is no separate cause of action for punitive damages. See, Barry v City of New York, 259…

Parametric Capital Management v. Lacher

Before: Andrias, J.P., Marlow, Nardelli, Williams and Sweeny, JJ. Plaintiffs' motion for leave to replead was…