Naetzker v. Brocton Central School District
This text of 363 N.E.2d 351 (Naetzker v. Brocton Central School District) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and petitioner’s application for a stay of arbitration denied. The owner’s claim against the architects, which is cognizable in law either in contract or in tort, was interposed within the six-year Statute of Limitations applicable to contract actions. (CPLR 7502, subd [b]; Matter of Paver & Wildfoerster [Catholic High School Assn.], 38 NY2d 669.) The facts in the present case are "remarkably like those” in Paver & Wildfoerster itself (38 NY2d, at p 676) and the rule articulated in that case is fully applicable to this one. Since the claim was timely asserted, it was error to stay arbitration.
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.
Order reversed, etc.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
363 N.E.2d 351, 41 N.Y.2d 929, 41 N.Y. 929, 394 N.Y.S.2d 627, 1977 N.Y. LEXIS 1993, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/naetzker-v-brocton-central-school-district-ny-1977.