McCarthy v. Martin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McCarthy v. Martin

122 A.D.2d 354, 504 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59684

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

DecidedJuly 10, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 122 A.D.2d 354 (McCarthy v. Martin) 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

McCarthy v. Martin, 122 A.D.2d 354, 504 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59684 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— Mikoll, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term (Bradley, J.), entered May 24, 1985 in Albany County, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to comply with the Statute of Limitations.

It is uncontroverted that plaintiff’s cause of action was not timely commenced. Plaintiff opposes the motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground of estoppel. We concur with Special Term’s decision that plaintiff has failed to support her allega[355]*355tion of reliance on representations of defendant to excuse her failure to commence the action within the statutory limits.

Order affirmed, without costs. Kane, J. P., Main, Casey, Mikoll and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.

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

— Mikoll, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term (Bradley, J.), entered May 24, 1985 in Albany County, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to comply with the Statute of Limitations.

It is uncontroverted that plaintiff’s cause of action was not timely commenced. Plaintiff opposes the motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground of estoppel. We concur with Special Term’s decision that plaintiff has failed to support her allega[355]*355tion of reliance on representations of defendant to excuse her failure to commence the action within the statutory limits.

Order affirmed, without costs. Kane, J. P., Main, Casey, Mikoll and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

122 A.D.2d 354, 504 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccarthy-v-martin-nyappdiv-1986.