20 Clarke Place Realty Corp. v. Rudges & Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

20 Clarke Place Realty Corp. v. Rudges & Co.

267 A.D.2d 141, 700 N.Y.S.2d 23, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13260

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 21, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 267 A.D.2d 141 (20 Clarke Place Realty Corp. v. Rudges & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

20 Clarke Place Realty Corp. v. Rudges & Co., 267 A.D.2d 141, 700 N.Y.S.2d 23, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13260 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Jerry Crispino, J.), entered December 16,1998, which denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendants’ motion to dismiss was properly denied on the ground that plaintiff commenced this action sounding in breach of contract within the applicable six-year statutory period. Defendant insurance brokers and agents are not professionals and, accordingly, the three-year Statute of Limitations for malpractice (CPLR 214 [6]) is not applicable as a bar to plaintiff’s action (see, Santiago v 1370 Broadway Assocs., 264 AD2d 624). Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Mazzarelli, Wallach and Lerner, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Jerry Crispino, J.), entered December 16,1998, which denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendants’ motion to dismiss was properly denied on the ground that plaintiff commenced this action sounding in breach of contract within the applicable six-year statutory period. Defendant insurance brokers and agents are not professionals and, accordingly, the three-year Statute of Limitations for malpractice (CPLR 214 [6]) is not applicable as a bar to plaintiff’s action (see, Santiago v 1370 Broadway Assocs., 264 AD2d 624). Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Mazzarelli, Wallach and Lerner, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 141, 700 N.Y.S.2d 23, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13260, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/20-clarke-place-realty-corp-v-rudges-co-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack