The plaintiff brought an action to recognize and enforce a New York judgment against the defendants.
The defendants moved for leave to amend their statements of defence, advance crossclaims against each other, and issue third party claims against another individual named in the foreign judgment.
The court granted leave for the consented amendments regarding the voluntariness of the underlying settlement.
However, the court dismissed the motions for crossclaims and third party claims, finding them legally untenable as they improperly sought to relitigate substantive issues of contribution and indemnity that were not part of the foreign judgment.
