Lathron Inc. v. Village of Le Roy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lathron Inc. v. Village of Le Roy

33 A.D.2d 642, 305 N.Y.S.2d 140, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3063

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

DecidedOctober 23, 1969

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 33 A.D.2d 642 (Lathron Inc. v. Village of Le Roy) 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

Lathron Inc. v. Village of Le Roy, 33 A.D.2d 642, 305 N.Y.S.2d 140, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3063 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, motion granted and complaint dismissed, all without costs. Memorandum: The record clearly shows a lack of compliance with the requirements of section 341-b of the Village Law. It is abundantly clear that plaintiff’s cause of action, spelled out and limited by-its bill of particulars, accrued no later than 1964. (Kinner v. Board of Educ. Cent. School Dist. No. 1, 6 A D 2d 204, affd. 9 N Y 2d 845.) Thus the 1967 filing of the claim and subsequent commencement of the action were not timely. (See Northampton Constr. Corp. v. Village of Ocean Beach, 8 A D 2d 979; Municipal Serv. Co. v. Town of Colonie, 12 A D 2d 22, app. dsmd. 9 N Y 2d 753). (Appeal from order of Genesee Special Term denying motion to dismiss complaint in action on construction contract.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Del Vecchio, Witmer, Gabrielli and Moule, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed, motion granted and complaint dismissed, all without costs. Memorandum: The record clearly shows a lack of compliance with the requirements of section 341-b of the Village Law. It is abundantly clear that plaintiff’s cause of action, spelled out and limited by-its bill of particulars, accrued no later than 1964. (Kinner v. Board of Educ. Cent. School Dist. No. 1, 6 A D 2d 204, affd. 9 N Y 2d 845.) Thus the 1967 filing of the claim and subsequent commencement of the action were not timely. (See Northampton Constr. Corp. v. Village of Ocean Beach, 8 A D 2d 979; Municipal Serv. Co. v. Town of Colonie, 12 A D 2d 22, app. dsmd. 9 N Y 2d 753). (Appeal from order of Genesee Special Term denying motion to dismiss complaint in action on construction contract.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Del Vecchio, Witmer, Gabrielli and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.2d 642, 305 N.Y.S.2d 140, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3063, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lathron-inc-v-village-of-le-roy-nyappdiv-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack