ernal quotation marks omitted]; see Faiella v Tysens Park Apts., LLC, 110 AD3d 1028, 1029 [2013]). " 'A determination whether to grant such leave is within the [trial court's] broad discretion, and the exercise of that discretion will not be lightly disturbed' " (Beharrie v MRAG Dev., LLC, 210 AD3d 945, 946 [2022], quoting Krigsman v Cyngiel, 130 AD3d 786, 786 [2015]). "Parties may be added at any stage of the action by leave of court" (CPLR 1003; see Wei-Chao Chang v Chang, 221 AD3d 634, 636 [2023]).
Here, the first three causes of action in the proposed amended complaint, alleging employment discrimination and retaliation in violation of the NYCHRL, as well as the fifth cause of action, alleging breach of contract, are palpably insufficient and patently devoid of merit, as they fail to cure any of the defects that warranted dismissal of those causes of action in the original complaint (see Singh v T-Mobile, 232 AD3d 662, 667 [2024]; Precious Care Mgt., LLC v Monsey Care, LLC, 221 AD3d at 924-925; HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Cross, 205 AD3d 779, 782-783 [2022]; Strunk v Paterson, 145 AD3d at 701).