
    Robert D. O’Connell, P. C., Appellant, et al., Plaintiff, v Schlegel Corporation et al., Respondents, and Charles P. Schlegel, II, Intervenor-Respondent.
    (Appeal No. 1.)
   —Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: In affirming the order of Supreme Court, we note our acknowledgement of the concession by intervenor-defendant Charles P. Schlegel, II that issues pertaining to stock ownership and/or entitlement to merger consideration have been competently placed in issue by plaintiffs. Moreover, we perceive no error in the strategy employed by Supreme Court in managing this litigation. By granting plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend their reply to intervenor-defendant’s counterclaim, the court placed both plaintiffs and intervenor-defendant in position fully to litigate their dispute regarding stock ownership and/or entitlement to merger consideration. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Boehm, J.—Intervention.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.  