Capstone Enterprises of Port Chester, Inc. v. Valhalla Union Free School District

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Capstone Enterprises of Port Chester, Inc. v. Valhalla Union Free School District

27 A.D.3d 411, 809 N.Y.S.2d 917

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 7, 2006·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (La Cava, J.), entered April 1, 2005, which granted the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 to dismiss the complaint for failure to comply with Education Law § 3813 (1) and (2-b).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

A cause of action alleging breach of contract arises, and the statute of limitations therefor begins to run, upon the breach (see John J. Kassner & Co. v City of New York, 46 NY2d 544 [1979]). “A breach of contract can be said to occur when the claimant’s bill is expressly rejected, or when the party seeking payment should have viewed his claim as having been construe[412]*412tively rejected” (Henry Boeckmann, Jr. & Assoc. v Board of Educ., Hempstead Union Free School Dist. No. 1, 207 AD2d 773, 775 [1994] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see D.J.H. Mech. Assoc., Ltd. v Mahopac Cent. School Dist., 21 AD3d 521 [2005]).

The defendant established that the plaintiffs damages were ascertainable when it demanded payment on July 30, 2003 and the request for payment was rejected by the defendant in a letter dated August 15, 2003. Thus, the cause of action accrued more than 90 days prior to the filing of the notice of claim and more than one year before commencement of the action. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss. Florio, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Covello, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (La Cava, J.), entered April 1, 2005, which granted the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 to dismiss the complaint for failure to comply with Education Law § 3813 (1) and (2-b).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

A cause of action alleging breach of contract arises, and the statute of limitations therefor begins to run, upon the breach (see John J. Kassner & Co. v City of New York, 46 NY2d 544 [1979]). “A breach of contract can be said to occur when the claimant’s bill is expressly rejected, or when the party seeking payment should have viewed his claim as having been construe[412]*412tively rejected” (Henry Boeckmann, Jr. & Assoc. v Board of Educ., Hempstead Union Free School Dist. No. 1, 207 AD2d 773, 775 [1994] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see D.J.H. Mech. Assoc., Ltd. v Mahopac Cent. School Dist., 21 AD3d 521 [2005]).

The defendant established that the plaintiffs damages were ascertainable when it demanded payment on July 30, 2003 and the request for payment was rejected by the defendant in a letter dated August 15, 2003. Thus, the cause of action accrued more than 90 days prior to the filing of the notice of claim and more than one year before commencement of the action. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss. Florio, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Covello, JJ., concur.

Capstone Enterprises of Port Chester, Inc. v. Valhalla Union Free School District, 27 A.D.3d 411, 809 N.Y.S.2d 917 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

27 A.D.3d 411 (Capstone Enterprises of Port Chester, Inc. v. Valhalla Union Free School District) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related