Mandel v. Hernandez 

Court properly denied request for relief consisting of both specific performance and estimated lost resale profits that were uncertain and not contemplated at the time of entering into contract for purchase of real estate to be renovated and resold. Court properly denied posttrial motion asking to amend pleadings to conform to the proofs at trial, as information supporting requested relief was available at time of original complaint. Court properly denied motion to amend pleadings to add a new cause of action, because amendments to a complaint postjudgment other than to conform to the proofs are not permitted. (O'MARA FROSSARD and NEVILLE, concurring.)