Legal Opinion
In re the Arbitration between Kliment & McKinsey & Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided December 16, 2004PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
CIPARICK, J.
In 1996, the Legislature amended CPLR 214 (6) to provide that the limitations period in nonmedical malpractice claims is three years, whether the complaint is cast in contract or in tort. In this case we are called upon to determine whether the breach of a provision in an architectural contract requiring that plans, drawings and specifications comply with applicable building codes is governed by the three-year statute of limitations for malpractice claims or the more generous six-year contract limitations period. We hold that the purpose of the statute is best *540s…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Enco Associates, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Santulli v. Englert, Reilly & McHugh, P. C.New York Court of Appeals · 1992
- Chase Scientific Research, Inc. v. Nia Group, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2001
- Brothers v. FlorenceNew York Court of Appeals · 2000
- In re the Arbitration between Kliment & Halsband & McKinsey & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
3Cited by3 opinions
- MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN KLIMENT & McKINSEY & CO.New York Court of Appeals · 2004
- Neogenix Oncology, Inc. v. GordonDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2015
- Wax NJ-2, LLC v. JFB Construction & DevelopmentDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2015