Schreier v. Law School Admission Council

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schreier v. Law School Admission Council

290 A.D.2d 367, 737 N.Y.S.2d 35, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 808

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

DecidedJanuary 29, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 290 A.D.2d 367 (Schreier v. Law School Admission Council) 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

Schreier v. Law School Admission Council, 290 A.D.2d 367, 737 N.Y.S.2d 35, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 808 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered October 16, 2000, which, in an action for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint as time barred, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff seeks damages for the one-year delay in his admission to law school, in September 1993 instead of September 1992, caused by defendant’s failure to forward his complete college transcript to the law schools to which he had applied. The cause of action for breach of contract was properly dismissed upon uncontroverted evidence that the last date any action was taken by defendant with regard to sending out materials to law schools for the September 1992 class was February 18, 1992, more than six years prior to the commencement of this action in February 1999 (see, Ely-Cruikshank Co. v Bank of Montreal, 81 NY2d 399, 402). Any cause of action plaintiff might have had for breach of fiduciary duty would also have accrued in 1992, and would therefore be time barred. Concur— Williams, J.P., Mazzarelli, Rosenberger, Wallach and Lerner, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered October 16, 2000, which, in an action for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint as time barred, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff seeks damages for the one-year delay in his admission to law school, in September 1993 instead of September 1992, caused by defendant’s failure to forward his complete college transcript to the law schools to which he had applied. The cause of action for breach of contract was properly dismissed upon uncontroverted evidence that the last date any action was taken by defendant with regard to sending out materials to law schools for the September 1992 class was February 18, 1992, more than six years prior to the commencement of this action in February 1999 (see, Ely-Cruikshank Co. v Bank of Montreal, 81 NY2d 399, 402). Any cause of action plaintiff might have had for breach of fiduciary duty would also have accrued in 1992, and would therefore be time barred. Concur— Williams, J.P., Mazzarelli, Rosenberger, Wallach and Lerner, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

290 A.D.2d 367, 737 N.Y.S.2d 35, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 808, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schreier-v-law-school-admission-council-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack