Rusiniak's Service, Inc. v. McMahon Agency, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rusiniak's Service, Inc. v. McMahon Agency, Inc.

294 A.D.2d 910, 741 N.Y.S.2d 471, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4463

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

DecidedMay 3, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 294 A.D.2d 910 (Rusiniak's Service, Inc. v. McMahon Agency, 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

Rusiniak's Service, Inc. v. McMahon Agency, Inc., 294 A.D.2d 910, 741 N.Y.S.2d 471, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4463 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (NeMoyer, J.), entered January 31, 2001, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by denying in part defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred and reinstating the breach of contract cause of action and as modified the order is affirmed without costs.

[911]*911Memorandum: Plaintiffs breach of contract cause of action against defendant insurance agent is governed by a six-year statute of limitations (see CPLR 213 [2]; Chase Scientific Research v NIA Group, 96 NY2d 20, 30-31; see also Santiago v 1370 Broadway Assoc., 96 NY2d 765, 766). Thus, we modify the order by denying in part defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint as time barred and reinstating the breach of contract cause of action. Present—Pigott, Jr, P.J., Hurlbutt, Kehoe, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

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

—Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (NeMoyer, J.), entered January 31, 2001, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by denying in part defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred and reinstating the breach of contract cause of action and as modified the order is affirmed without costs.

[911]*911Memorandum: Plaintiffs breach of contract cause of action against defendant insurance agent is governed by a six-year statute of limitations (see CPLR 213 [2]; Chase Scientific Research v NIA Group, 96 NY2d 20, 30-31; see also Santiago v 1370 Broadway Assoc., 96 NY2d 765, 766). Thus, we modify the order by denying in part defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint as time barred and reinstating the breach of contract cause of action. Present—Pigott, Jr, P.J., Hurlbutt, Kehoe, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 910, 741 N.Y.S.2d 471, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4463, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rusiniaks-service-inc-v-mcmahon-agency-inc-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack