Lugo v. Purple & White Markets, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lugo v. Purple & White Markets, Inc.

82 A.D.3d 521, 918 N.Y.2d 453

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

DecidedMarch 15, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 82 A.D.3d 521 (Lugo v. Purple & White Markets, Inc.) 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

Lugo v. Purple & White Markets, Inc., 82 A.D.3d 521, 918 N.Y.2d 453 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

The motion court properly denied White Rose’s motion for a default judgment against FICA and compelled acceptance of FICA’s answer. White Rose’s attempt to serve FICA pursuant to CPLR 3215 (g) (4) (i) was plainly inadequate, as it was not sent to FICA’s last known address.

The motion court also properly dismissed the breach of contract cause of action, brought by White Rose Foods, Inc., for FICA’s failure to obtain insurance coverage. The 2001 agreement, which provided the only basis for a relationship between White Rose Foods and FICA, contained an express provision barring any civil actions brought more than two years after the occurrence giving rise to the claim. Here, the evidence of insurance coverage was to have been provided to White Rose Foods on or about December 19, 2001, making December 2003 the latest this claim for breach could have been brought. Thus, the breach of contract claim is untimely.

We have considered White Rose’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Saxe, J.E, Sweeny, Catterson, Freedman and Román, JJ.

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

The motion court properly denied White Rose’s motion for a default judgment against FICA and compelled acceptance of FICA’s answer. White Rose’s attempt to serve FICA pursuant to CPLR 3215 (g) (4) (i) was plainly inadequate, as it was not sent to FICA’s last known address.

The motion court also properly dismissed the breach of contract cause of action, brought by White Rose Foods, Inc., for FICA’s failure to obtain insurance coverage. The 2001 agreement, which provided the only basis for a relationship between White Rose Foods and FICA, contained an express provision barring any civil actions brought more than two years after the occurrence giving rise to the claim. Here, the evidence of insurance coverage was to have been provided to White Rose Foods on or about December 19, 2001, making December 2003 the latest this claim for breach could have been brought. Thus, the breach of contract claim is untimely.

We have considered White Rose’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Saxe, J.E, Sweeny, Catterson, Freedman and Román, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 A.D.3d 521, 918 N.Y.2d 453, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lugo-v-purple-white-markets-inc-nyappdiv-2011.