Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Village of Lake Success

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Village of Lake Success

33 A.D.3d 958, 822 N.Y.S.2d 731

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 31, 2006·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In a subrogation action, in effect, to recover the sum of $233,471.91 paid to the subrogor insured for property damage incurred on February 14, 2004, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Connell, J), dated [959] October 11, 2005, which granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the action as time-barred.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The statute of limitations was not tolled for the period between the defendant’s demand for a hearing pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-h and the hearing (see Baez v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 168 AD2d 529, 530 [1990], affd 80 NY2d 571 [1992]; Mignott v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 250 AD2d 165, 171 [1998]; Cinqumani v County of Nassau, 28 AD3d 699 [2006]). Further, there is no basis to apply the doctrine of equitable estoppel to the defendant (see Spirig v Evans, 26 AD3d 425 [2006]; Bennett v Metro-North Commuter R.R., 231 AD2d 662 [1996]). Ritter, J.E, Goldstein, Rivera and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

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

In a subrogation action, in effect, to recover the sum of $233,471.91 paid to the subrogor insured for property damage incurred on February 14, 2004, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Connell, J), dated [959] October 11, 2005, which granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the action as time-barred.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The statute of limitations was not tolled for the period between the defendant’s demand for a hearing pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-h and the hearing (see Baez v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 168 AD2d 529, 530 [1990], affd 80 NY2d 571 [1992]; Mignott v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 250 AD2d 165, 171 [1998]; Cinqumani v County of Nassau, 28 AD3d 699 [2006]). Further, there is no basis to apply the doctrine of equitable estoppel to the defendant (see Spirig v Evans, 26 AD3d 425 [2006]; Bennett v Metro-North Commuter R.R., 231 AD2d 662 [1996]). Ritter, J.E, Goldstein, Rivera and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Village of Lake Success, 33 A.D.3d 958, 822 N.Y.S.2d 731 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

33 A.D.3d 958 (Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Village of Lake Success) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related