Home/New York Court of Appeals/State of New York Higher Education Services Corp. v. Zamore

State of New York Higher Education Services Corp. v. Zamore

453 N.E.2d 526, 59 N.Y.2d 933, 466 N.Y.S.2d 297, 1983 N.Y. LEXIS 3246
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 28, 1983
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 453 N.E.2d 526 (State of New York Higher Education Services Corp. v. Zamore) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State of New York Higher Education Services Corp. v. Zamore, 453 N.E.2d 526, 59 N.Y.2d 933, 466 N.Y.S.2d 297, 1983 N.Y. LEXIS 3246 (N.Y. 1983).

Opinions

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

The loan contract having been made by defendant in New York while a resident of New York, jurisdiction over him was obtainable by service outside the State and plaintiff had knowledge of his address well before the Statute of Limitations ran. Although the Congress has seen fit to limit the right of a student borrower to a discharge in bankruptcy (US Code, tit 11, § 523, subd [a], par [8]; see State of New York v Wilkes, 41 NY2d 655), neither the Congress nor our State Legislature has excluded student loan contracts from the ambit of the six-year period of limitations applicable to contracts (CPLR 213).

The contract provision requiring that defendant report annually to the lending institution to renew or extend his obligation does not help plaintiff because it too was breached more than six years ago. Furthermore, there [935]*935being neither an act of defendant misleading plaintiff nor reliance by plaintiff, the provision of section 17-103 (subd 4, par b [recognizing estoppel to plead limitations]) of the General Obligations Law does not help plaintiff.

Finally, the suggestion that the total number (168,892) and amount ($343,135,032) of defaulted student loans is a reason for treating such loans differently than other contracts is more properly addressed to the Legislature.

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

Related

Kalamadden v. Singh
10 Misc. 3d 328 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 2005)
Eberhard v. Elmira City School District
6 A.D.3d 971 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Bayridge Air Rights, Inc. v. Blitman Construction Corp.
599 N.E.2d 673 (New York Court of Appeals, 1992)
Burpee v. Burpee
152 Misc. 2d 466 (New York Supreme Court, 1991)
Bayridge Air Rights, Inc. v. Blitman Construction Corp.
160 A.D.2d 589 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
State v. Cohen
158 A.D.2d 894 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
State of New York Higher Education Services Corp. v. McGarry
151 A.D.2d 819 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
State of New York Higher Education Services Corp. v. Langus
140 A.D.2d 792 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Jeanne Allyn Smith v. Franklin Karl Smith
830 F.2d 11 (Second Circuit, 1987)
New York State Higher Education Services Corp. v. Muson
117 A.D.2d 947 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
453 N.E.2d 526, 59 N.Y.2d 933, 466 N.Y.S.2d 297, 1983 N.Y. LEXIS 3246, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-new-york-higher-education-services-corp-v-zamore-ny-1983.