Ryder v. Tannenbaum

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Ryder v. Tannenbaum

137 Misc. 2d 326, 524 N.Y.S.2d 321, 1987 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2587

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedApril 30, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 137 Misc. 2d 326 (Ryder v. Tannenbaum) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ryder v. Tannenbaum, 137 Misc. 2d 326, 524 N.Y.S.2d 321, 1987 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2587 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Judgment affirmed, without costs.

We are in accord with the view expressed by the court below that for Statute of Limitations purposes a claim is [327]*327interposed at the time the claimant pays the filing and mailing fees and not at the time the notice is served upon the defendant. We note that CPLR 203 (b) concerns claims in complaints and is not applicable to the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court. Although we agree with the appellant that the payment of the filing fee does not confer jurisdiction over her, nevertheless, such act is sufficient to stop the running of the Statute of Limitations.

Kassoff, P. J., Monteleone and Lerner, JJ., concur.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Judgment affirmed, without costs.

We are in accord with the view expressed by the court below that for Statute of Limitations purposes a claim is [327]*327interposed at the time the claimant pays the filing and mailing fees and not at the time the notice is served upon the defendant. We note that CPLR 203 (b) concerns claims in complaints and is not applicable to the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court. Although we agree with the appellant that the payment of the filing fee does not confer jurisdiction over her, nevertheless, such act is sufficient to stop the running of the Statute of Limitations.

Kassoff, P. J., Monteleone and Lerner, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 Misc. 2d 326, 524 N.Y.S.2d 321, 1987 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2587, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ryder-v-tannenbaum-nyappterm-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack