DiMiceli v. Credit Shelter Trust

Summary

The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed orders denying the plaintiff leave to amend the complaint to add Skanska Civil Northeast, Inc., and denying renewal of that request. The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish that Skanska Civil Northeast and Skanska USA were united in interest for purposes of the relation-back doctrine. The court also affirmed denial of Skanska USA's renewed summary judgment cross-motion because the plaintiff demonstrated that further discovery might lead to relevant evidence.

Holdings

1. The plaintiff failed to establish that Skanska Northeast and Skanska USA were united in interest because they were separate corporations with different defenses; therefore, leave to amend the complaint to add Skanska Northeast was properly denied.
2. The plaintiff was not entitled to renewal because he failed to demonstrate that the purported new facts would change the prior determination denying leave to amend.
3. The denial of Skanska USA's renewed cross-motion for summary judgment was properly affirmed because the plaintiff demonstrated that discovery might lead to relevant evidence necessary to oppose the motion.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the plaintiff established the relation-back doctrine's requirements for adding Skanska Civil Northeast, Inc. as a defendant after the limitations period.
2. Whether the plaintiff was entitled to renew his motion for leave to amend the complaint based on purportedly new facts.
3. Whether Skanska USA, Inc.'s renewed cross-motion for summary judgment was premature because discovery might lead to relevant evidence.

Disposition

affirmed