On December 29, 2009, in an action for the wrongful death of the plaintiffs’ minor child, Manhattan’s Appellate Division, First Department, ruled thatheld that, under N.Y. C.P.L.R. 3025, “the need for additional discovery does not constitute prejudice sufficient to justify denial of an amendment” of a pleading., under section 3025 of the C.P.L.R., “the need for additional discovery does not constitute prejudice sufficient to justify denial of an amendment” of a complaint or other pleading. Jacobson v. McNeil Consumer & Specialty Pharmaceuticals, 2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 09694 (N.Y. App. Div. Dec. 29, 2009).
Accordingly, the Jacobson Court reversed the Supreme Court’s order, which had rejected the plaintiffs’ application to serve and file a second amended complaint adding an anti-seizure medication, produced by the defendants, to causes of action already asserted concerning two medications for pain. The First Department’s opinion, linked below, is consistent with Manhattan’s liberal standard for amending pleadings.
David S. Rich is the founding member of the Law Offices of David S. Rich, LLC,
a Manhattan Employment and Business Litigation Law Firm, in New
York City and in Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey...View Profile