Fiore v. Sibley, Lindsay & Curr Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fiore v. Sibley, Lindsay & Curr Co.

93 A.D.2d 973, 461 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17876

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

DecidedApril 1, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 93 A.D.2d 973 (Fiore v. Sibley, Lindsay & Curr 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

Fiore v. Sibley, Lindsay & Curr Co., 93 A.D.2d 973, 461 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17876 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The action was properly dismissed as time barred, since the summons and complaint, alleging fraud, were served eight years after the commission of the act and two and one-half years after discovery of the alleged fraud. The Statute of Limitations for fraud is six years from the commission of the act, or two years from the actual or imputed discovery of the fraud (CPLR 213, subd 8; 203, subd [f]; Smith v Sarkisian, 63 AD2d 780, affd 47 NY2d 878). Section 2-725 of the Uniform Commercial Code is inapplicable since its provisions cover only causes of action based on breach of contract for sale or breach of warranty. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Provenzano, J. — dismiss complaint.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Boomer, Moule and Schnepp, JJ.

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

— Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The action was properly dismissed as time barred, since the summons and complaint, alleging fraud, were served eight years after the commission of the act and two and one-half years after discovery of the alleged fraud. The Statute of Limitations for fraud is six years from the commission of the act, or two years from the actual or imputed discovery of the fraud (CPLR 213, subd 8; 203, subd [f]; Smith v Sarkisian, 63 AD2d 780, affd 47 NY2d 878). Section 2-725 of the Uniform Commercial Code is inapplicable since its provisions cover only causes of action based on breach of contract for sale or breach of warranty. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Provenzano, J. — dismiss complaint.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Boomer, Moule and Schnepp, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

93 A.D.2d 973, 461 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17876, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fiore-v-sibley-lindsay-curr-co-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack