DeGori v. Long Island Rail Road

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DeGori v. Long Island Rail Road

202 A.D.2d 549, 610 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2651

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

DecidedMarch 21, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 202 A.D.2d 549 (DeGori v. Long Island Rail Road) 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

DeGori v. Long Island Rail Road, 202 A.D.2d 549, 610 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2651 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Underwood, J.), dated March 12, 1992, as denied its motion to dismiss the complaint as barred by the Statute of Limitations.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the complaint is dismissed.

There is no evidence to support the plaintiff’s contention that conduct by the defendant induced him to forego instituting the present action, so as to equitably estop the defendant from asserting the Statute of Limitations. Only a showing of fraud, misrepresentation, deception, or similar affirmative misconduct, along with reasonable reliance upon it, will jus[550]*550tify the imposition of such an estoppel (see, Gallo v County of Westchester, 162 AD2d 584; Park Assocs. v Crescent Park Assocs., 159 AD2d 460). In the present case, the evidence clearly demonstrates that the failure to timely commence the action was due solely to law office failure (see, Gluckin v Insurance Co., 169 AD2d 494). Mangano, P. J., Balletta, O’Brien and Florio, JJ., concur, t

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Underwood, J.), dated March 12, 1992, as denied its motion to dismiss the complaint as barred by the Statute of Limitations.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the complaint is dismissed.

There is no evidence to support the plaintiff’s contention that conduct by the defendant induced him to forego instituting the present action, so as to equitably estop the defendant from asserting the Statute of Limitations. Only a showing of fraud, misrepresentation, deception, or similar affirmative misconduct, along with reasonable reliance upon it, will jus[550]*550tify the imposition of such an estoppel (see, Gallo v County of Westchester, 162 AD2d 584; Park Assocs. v Crescent Park Assocs., 159 AD2d 460). In the present case, the evidence clearly demonstrates that the failure to timely commence the action was due solely to law office failure (see, Gluckin v Insurance Co., 169 AD2d 494). Mangano, P. J., Balletta, O’Brien and Florio, JJ., concur, t

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 A.D.2d 549, 610 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/degori-v-long-island-rail-road-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack