Karczewski v. Sharpe

260 A.D.2d 606, 688 N.Y.S.2d 673, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4294
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 26, 1999·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for assault and battery, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (D’Emilio, J.), dated April 2, 1998, which denied her motion for leave to amend her complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs motion for leave to amend her complaint to assert a cause of action alleging a violation of Executive Law § 296 (2) (a) was properly denied as it was made after the expiration of the three-year Statute of Limitations under CPLR 214 (2). Furthermore, the cause of action alleging a violation of Executive Law § 296 (2) (a) cannot relate back to the filing of the original complaint as that action was not timely commenced (see, Maldonado v Maryland Rail Commuter Serv. Admin., 239 AD2d 740, affd 91 NY2d 467; Owens v Palm Tree Nursing Home, 50 AD2d 865). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

Karczewski v. Sharpe, 260 A.D.2d 606, 688 N.Y.S.2d 673, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4294 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

260 A.D.2d 606 (Karczewski v. Sharpe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Richardson v. Tops Mkts., LLC
2025 NY Slip Op 06404 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
Gordon v. Suffolk County
E.D. New York, 2022
Leszczynski v. Kelly & McGlynn
281 A.D.2d 519 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Bonanno v. City of Rye
280 A.D.2d 631 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)