Legal Opinion

Naetzker v. Brocton Central School District

New York Court of Appeals

Decided March 24, 1977PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and petitioner’s application for a stay of arbitration denied. The owner’s claim against the architects, which is cognizable in law either in contract or in tort, was interposed within the six-year Statute of Limitations applicable to contract actions. (CPLR 7502, subd [b]; Matter of Paver & Wildfoerster [Catholic High School Assn.], 38 NY2d 669.) The facts in the present case are "remarkably like those” in Paver & Wildfoerster itself (38 NY2d, at p 676) and the rule articulated in that case is fully applicable to…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In re the Arbitration between Paver & Wildfoerster & Catholic High School Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1976

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Schoenrock v. TappeSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Muller v. SturmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
  3. Bennin v. Ramapo General HospitalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
  4. Queensbury Union Free School District v. Jim Walter Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1977
  5. School Bd. of Seminole County v. GAF Corp.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API