The Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend the first amended complaint, particularly where plaintiff acknowledges that it could have sought leave sooner, but strategically chose not to. The plaintiff's additional allegations supplement claims already deemed sufficiently pleaded, and those further allegations would prejudice the defendant at this late stage, when discovery has closed, trial is scheduled to commence, and the defendant's summary judgment motion is pending.
Atlas MF Mezzanine Borrower, LLC v. Macquarie Tex. Loan Holder LLC, NY Slip Op 01709 (1st Dep't March 12, 2020)
Here is the decision.
