Board of Education of Middle Country Central School District at Centereach v. Polymer Plastics Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Board of Education of Middle Country Central School District at Centereach v. Polymer Plastics Corp.

199 A.D.2d 453, 608 N.Y.S.2d 106, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12309

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

DecidedDecember 27, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 199 A.D.2d 453 (Board of Education of Middle Country Central School District at Centereach v. Polymer Plastics Corp.) 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

Board of Education of Middle Country Central School District at Centereach v. Polymer Plastics Corp., 199 A.D.2d 453, 608 N.Y.S.2d 106, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12309 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages, inter alia, for breach of warranty, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gerard, J.), dated October 9, 1991, as granted that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was to dismiss its fifth affirmative defense.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant maintains that the court erred in dismissing its fifth affirmative defense which alleged that the plaintiff’s breach of warranty action was untimely. We disagree. Whether the contract entered into by the parties is deemed as one for the performance of services or as a contract for the sale of goods, the plaintiff’s action was timely commenced (see, Bulova Watch Co. v Celotex Corp., 46 NY2d 606, 611; Scott & Son v American Bldgs. Co., 93 AD2d 987). Thompson, J. P., Sullivan, Miller, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages, inter alia, for breach of warranty, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gerard, J.), dated October 9, 1991, as granted that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was to dismiss its fifth affirmative defense.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant maintains that the court erred in dismissing its fifth affirmative defense which alleged that the plaintiff’s breach of warranty action was untimely. We disagree. Whether the contract entered into by the parties is deemed as one for the performance of services or as a contract for the sale of goods, the plaintiff’s action was timely commenced (see, Bulova Watch Co. v Celotex Corp., 46 NY2d 606, 611; Scott & Son v American Bldgs. Co., 93 AD2d 987). Thompson, J. P., Sullivan, Miller, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 A.D.2d 453, 608 N.Y.S.2d 106, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/board-of-education-of-middle-country-central-school-district-at-centereach-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack