Bassile v. Covenant House

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bassile v. Covenant House

191 A.D.2d 188, 594 N.Y.S.2d 192, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1844

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

DecidedMarch 2, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 191 A.D.2d 188 (Bassile v. Covenant House) 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

Bassile v. Covenant House, 191 A.D.2d 188, 594 N.Y.S.2d 192, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1844 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Baer, Jr., J.), entered November 21, 1991, dismissing the complaint as barred by the Statute of Limitations, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We agree with the IAS Court that absent statutory authorization no "delayed discovery” rule exists to toll the Statute of Limitations in actions for personal injury based on sexual abuse, and that plaintiff’s causes of action are governed by the general rule that the Statute of Limitations begins to run at the time of the commission of the alleged tortious act (see, Goldsmith v Howmedica, Inc., 67 NY2d 120). We also agree that the Statute of Limitations was not tolled by duress, and that defendants are not equitably estopped from asserting it. The alleged misconduct of the individual defendant occurred in 1973, and plaintiff makes no showing that he thereafter refrained from instituting an action because of defendants’ coercion, misrepresentation or concealment of facts. We have considered plaintiff’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ross, Asch and Rubin, JJ. [See, 152 Misc 2d 88.]

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Baer, Jr., J.), entered November 21, 1991, dismissing the complaint as barred by the Statute of Limitations, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We agree with the IAS Court that absent statutory authorization no "delayed discovery” rule exists to toll the Statute of Limitations in actions for personal injury based on sexual abuse, and that plaintiff’s causes of action are governed by the general rule that the Statute of Limitations begins to run at the time of the commission of the alleged tortious act (see, Goldsmith v Howmedica, Inc., 67 NY2d 120). We also agree that the Statute of Limitations was not tolled by duress, and that defendants are not equitably estopped from asserting it. The alleged misconduct of the individual defendant occurred in 1973, and plaintiff makes no showing that he thereafter refrained from instituting an action because of defendants’ coercion, misrepresentation or concealment of facts. We have considered plaintiff’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ross, Asch and Rubin, JJ. [See, 152 Misc 2d 88.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 A.D.2d 188, 594 N.Y.S.2d 192, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1844, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bassile-v-covenant-house-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack