ADAM ROBINSON, plf-res, v.LAURADAY def-ap, DAVID J. DEPINTO def

9072N. ADAM ROBINSON, plf-res, v.LAURADAY def-ap, DAVID J. DEPINTO def — Peter R. Ginsberg Law, LLC, New York (Peter R. Ginsberg of counsel), for ap — The Serbagi Law Firm, P.C., New York (Christopher Serbagi of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Melvin L. Schweitzer, J.), entered April 17, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from, granted plaintiff leave to amend his amended complaint, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to deny leave with respect to the thirteenth, twenty-seventh, thirtieth, thirty-third, thirty-fourth, and thirty sixth causes of action of the second amended complaint (SAC), and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

We are not persuaded by defendants’ argument that they have been prejudiced by plaintiff’s allegedly excessive delay in moving to amend. “Mere lateness is not a barrier to the amendment” (Edenwald Contr. Co. v. City of New York, 60 NY2d 957, 959 [1983] [internal quotation marks omitted]). “Prejudice requires some indication that the defendant has been hindered in the preparation of his case or has been prevented from taking some measure in support of his position” (Kocourek v. Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., 85 AD3d 502, 504 [1st Dept 2011] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Defendants failed to demonstrate such prejudice.