Ruddy v. Citibank

224 A.D.2d 509, 637 N.Y.S.2d 793, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1158
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 13, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 224 A.D.2d 509 (Ruddy v. Citibank) 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
Ruddy v. Citibank, 224 A.D.2d 509, 637 N.Y.S.2d 793, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1158 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for breach of contract and trespass to chattel, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Amann, J.), dated May 26, 1994, as granted those branches of the defendant’s motion which were to dismiss all causes of action asserted in the complaint other than the cause of action to recover damages for breach of contract.

Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof which granted that branch of the [510]*510defendant’s motion which was to dismiss the cause of action to recover damages for trespass to chattel and substituting therefor a provision denying that branch of the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The complaint asserts a cause of action sounding in trespass to chattel, which is governed by a three-year Statute of Limitations and is thus not time-barred (see, Jemison v Crichlow, 139 AD2d 332, affd 74 NY2d 726; Prosser and Keeton, Torts § 14, at 85-88 [5th ed]).

There is no separate cause of action to recover punitive damages (see, Rocanova v Equitable Life Assur. Socy., 83 NY2d 603). Accordingly, the fifth cause of action to recover punitive damages was properly dismissed.

The parties’ remaining contentions are without merit or need not be addressed at this juncture. Rosenblatt, J. P., O’Brien, Pizzuto and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

Related

CA, Inc. v. Rocket Software, Inc.
579 F. Supp. 2d 355 (E.D. New York, 2008)
Glatter v. Chase Manhattan Bank
239 A.D.2d 68 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
224 A.D.2d 509, 637 N.Y.S.2d 793, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1158, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ruddy-v-citibank-nyappdiv-1996.