Glachan v. Archdiocese

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Glachan v. Archdiocese

229 A.D.2d 468, 645 N.Y.S.2d 529, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7781

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

DecidedJuly 15, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 229 A.D.2d 468 (Glachan v. Archdiocese) 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

Glachan v. Archdiocese, 229 A.D.2d 468, 645 N.Y.S.2d 529, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7781 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for negligence, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Burrows, J.), dated September 20, 1995, which granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff did not commence the instant action, based upon incidents occurring between 1977 and 1981, until 1995. Thus, his causes of action sounding in negligence and breach of contract were time-barred when this action was commenced. Furthermore, the plaintiff failed to state a cause of action sounding in fraud (see, Doe v Roe, 192 AD2d 1089, 1090).

The defendant is not equitably estopped from pleading the Statute of Limitations as a defense since the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that a fiduciary relationship existed between himself and the defendant or that the defendant’s conduct induced him to refrain from timely commencing an action against it (see, Simcuski v Saeli, 44 NY2d 442; Zoe G. v Frederick F. G., 208 AD2d 675, 676; Gleason v Spota, 194 AD2d 764, 765; Phelps v Greco, 177 AD2d 559). Miller, J. P., O’Brien, Gold-stein and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for negligence, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Burrows, J.), dated September 20, 1995, which granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff did not commence the instant action, based upon incidents occurring between 1977 and 1981, until 1995. Thus, his causes of action sounding in negligence and breach of contract were time-barred when this action was commenced. Furthermore, the plaintiff failed to state a cause of action sounding in fraud (see, Doe v Roe, 192 AD2d 1089, 1090).

The defendant is not equitably estopped from pleading the Statute of Limitations as a defense since the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that a fiduciary relationship existed between himself and the defendant or that the defendant’s conduct induced him to refrain from timely commencing an action against it (see, Simcuski v Saeli, 44 NY2d 442; Zoe G. v Frederick F. G., 208 AD2d 675, 676; Gleason v Spota, 194 AD2d 764, 765; Phelps v Greco, 177 AD2d 559). Miller, J. P., O’Brien, Gold-stein and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

229 A.D.2d 468, 645 N.Y.S.2d 529, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7781, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glachan-v-archdiocese-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack