The motion court providently exercised its discretion in granting plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the complaint to correct defendant's name, pursuant to CPLR 305(c). Defendant did not dispute proper service, except by asserting that a defense based on improper service was raised in the answer. However, that defense did not specify any way in which service was improper. Moreover, defendant did not move to dismiss the complaint for improper service within 60 days of asserting the defense, thereby waiving any objection based on service, pursuant to CPLR 3211[e].
Mariette v. Amber Ct. of Pelham Gardens LHCSA, LLC, NY Slip Op 00490 (1st Dep't February 2, 2023)
