| Kinzelberg v Design Quest, Ltd. |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 08184 [67 AD3d 743] |
| November 10, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| Steven Kinzelberg, Appellant, v Design Quest, Ltd., et al., Respondents. |
—[*1]
Richard Rubens, Bronx, N.Y., respondent pro se.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Davis, J.), entered May 14, 2008, as granted that branch of the defendants' motion which was pursuant to CPLR 1003 to the extent of adding Messardiere Design Quest, Inc., as a defendant.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting that branch of the defendants' motion which was pursuant to CPLR 1003 to the extent of adding Messardiere Design Quest, Inc., as a defendant (see Merchants Bank of N.Y. v Rosenberg, 31 AD3d 507, 508 [2006]; Rutar v Hawes, 157 AD2d 654 [1990]).
The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.P., Florio, Miller and Hall, JJ., concur. [See 2008 NY Slip Op 31482(U).]