Rittner v. City University of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rittner v. City University of New York

267 A.D.2d 3, 698 N.Y.S.2d 491, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12377

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

DecidedDecember 2, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 267 A.D.2d 3 (Rittner v. City University of New York) 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

Rittner v. City University of New York, 267 A.D.2d 3, 698 N.Y.S.2d 491, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12377 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Court of Claims of the State of New York, New York County (Alan Marin, J.), entered April 22, 1998, which granted respondent’s motion for summary judgment dismissing appellant’s claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly determined that appellant’s claim is time-barred pursuant to CPLR 213 (2). Insofar as her claim relates to events which are prior to respondent’s December 1987 letter discontinuing reimbursement, it is outside the applicable six-year Statute of Limitations. As to subsequent events, they cannot credibly be construed as creating a contract (see, 1 Williston, Contracts § 3:2, at 200-203 [4th ed]). Concur— Ellerin, P. J., Nardelli, Lerner, Andidas and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Order, Court of Claims of the State of New York, New York County (Alan Marin, J.), entered April 22, 1998, which granted respondent’s motion for summary judgment dismissing appellant’s claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly determined that appellant’s claim is time-barred pursuant to CPLR 213 (2). Insofar as her claim relates to events which are prior to respondent’s December 1987 letter discontinuing reimbursement, it is outside the applicable six-year Statute of Limitations. As to subsequent events, they cannot credibly be construed as creating a contract (see, 1 Williston, Contracts § 3:2, at 200-203 [4th ed]). Concur— Ellerin, P. J., Nardelli, Lerner, Andidas and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 3, 698 N.Y.S.2d 491, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rittner-v-city-university-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack