New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

Healey v. STATE OF NEW YORK, #2003-018-221, Claim No. 98766, Motion No. M-66707


Synopsis


Claimant's motion to amend the ad damnum clause is granted.

Case Information

UID:
2003-018-221
Claimant(s):
AMANDA HEALEY, As Administratrix of the goods, chattels and credits of JEFFREY ALAN HEALEY, Deceased.
Claimant short name:
Healey
Footnote (claimant name) :

Defendant(s):
STATE OF NEW YORK
Footnote (defendant name) :

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
98766
Motion number(s):
M-66707
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
DIANE L. FITZPATRICK
Claimant's attorney:
LOCKWOOD & GOLDENBy: B. Brooks Benson, Esquire
Defendant's attorney:
ELIOT SPITZER
Attorney General of the State of New York
By: Patricia M. Bordonaro, EsquireAssistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
May 22, 2003
City:
Syracuse
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)


Decision
Claimant makes a motion pursuant to CPLR 3025(b) to amend the ad damnum clause of

the claim for the wrongful death of Jeffrey Alan Healey from One Million Dollars to Two Million Dollars. Defendant takes no position on the motion.
The Court, after a trial on the issue of liability, found the State 100 percent liable for the death of the decedent as a result of an offset head-on-collision on August 14, 1996, on State Route 26 in Lewis County. The case is now scheduled for a trial on the issue of damages on June 2, 2003.

Leave to amend pleadings shall be freely given within the discretion of the trial court absent prejudice to the opposing party (CPLR 3025(b);
Edenwald Contracting Co. Inc. v City of New York, 60 NY2d 957) "Where no prejudice is shown, the amendment may be allowed ‘during or even after trial'" (Loomis v Civetta Corinno Const. Corp., 54 NY2d 18, 23, quoting Dittmar Explosives v A. E. Ottaviano, Inc., 20 NY2d 498, 502). Prejudice does not result from merely the exposure of the defendant to greater liability, but instead involves limiting the defendant's ability to prepare its case or eliminating an opportunity it could have had to support its position (Loomis v Civetta Corinno Const. Corp., 54 NY2d at18, 23 ). In this case, there is no prejudice to the defendant, and none is asserted.
Accordingly claimant's motion is GRANTED. Claimant is directed to file and serve defendant with a copy of the amended pleading increasing the ad damnum clause for the wrongful death cause of action from One Million Dollars to Two Million Dollars within ten days of service of a filed copy of this decision and order.

May 22, 2003
Syracuse, New York

HON. DIANE L. FITZPATRICK
Judge of the Court of Claims


The Court considered the following documents in deciding this motion:

Notice of Motion.........................................................................................1

Affidavit of B. Brooks Benson, Esquire, in support with exhibits

attached thereto................................................................................2


Letter dated April 18, 2003 from Assistant Attorney General,

Patricia M. Bordonaro, Esquire........................................................3