Citation Numbers: 143 A.D.2d 429
Filed Date: 9/26/1988
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 1/13/2022
In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff wife appeals, as limited by her notice of appeal and brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Delaney, J.), entered September 1, 1987, as denied her motion for leave to amend the complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
It is firmly established that, while leave to amend a pleading shall be freely granted (see, CPLR 3025 [b]), a motion to amend is committed to the broad discretion of the trial court (see, Edenwald Contr. Co. v City of New York, 60 NY2d 957; Kramer & Sons v Facilities Dev. Corp., 135 AD2d 942; Fulford v Baker Perkins, 100 AD2d 861), and the resulting determination “will not lightly be set aside” (Beuschel v Malm, 114 AD2d 569).
The record before us reveals that the plaintiff unduly delayed in seeking to amend her complaint despite her awareness of the alleged facts underlying the proposed amendment