Majority
p. 777Carl R. Charleson et al., Respondents, v City of Long Beach et al., Appellants. [747 NYS2d 802]
p. 778
In the absence of surprise or prejudice to the opposing party, leave to amend a complaint is to be freely granted (see CPLR 3025 [b]; Edenwald Contr. Co. v City of New York, 60 NY2d 957 ; Dal Youn Chung v Farberov, 285 AD2d 524 ). Here, however, the plaintiffs’ proposed fourth cause of action, alleging violations of the Federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act ( 18 USC § 1962 ), was not adequately pleaded and is plainly lacking in merit (see Curran v Auto Lab Serv. Ctr., 280 AD2d 636 ; 136 E. 56th St. Owners v Darnet Realty Assoc., 248 AD2d 327 , 328; Schuler v Board of Educ. of Cent. Islip Union Free School Dist., 2000 WL 134346 [ED NY, Feb. 1, 2000]; United States v Private Sanitation Indus. Assn. of Nassau/Suffolk, 793 F Supp 1114 , 1129).
The appellants’ remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J.P., Krausman, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Edenwald Contracting Co. v. City of New York 60 NY2d 957 p. 778
- Chung v. Farberov 285 AD2d 524 p. 778
- 136 East 56th Street Owners, Inc. v. Darnet Realty Associates 248 AD2d 327 at 328 p. 778