2 No. 24
Chase Scientific Research, Inc.,
Appellant,
v.
NIA Group, Inc., a/k/a NIA-KLT, et al.,
Respondents.
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
2 No. 25
Giuseppe Gugliotta,
Appellant, et al., Plaintiff,
v.
Apollo Roland Brokerage, Inc., et al.,
Respondents, et al.,
Defendants.
_________________________________________________________________
Case No. 24:
_________________________________________________________________
2001 NY Int. 24
March 22, 2001
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
in the New York Reports.
Scott D. Brenner, for appellant.
Stephen C. Cunningham, for respondents.
Case No. 25: Steven H. Beldock, for appellant.
Stephen C. Cunningham, for respondents.
_________________________________________________________________
KAYE, CHIEF JUDGE:
Under CPLR 214 (6), a three-year statute of limitations is
applicable in nonmedical malpractice actions, regardless of whether
the underlying theory is based in contract or tort. The appeals now
before us raise the novel issue of what "malpractice" means in this
statute. Put another way, given that malpractice is professional
misfeasance toward one's client, who is a "professional" within the
section? The question arises in the context of insurance agents and
brokers.
I.
SNIPPETS:
Giuseppe Gugliotta, Appellant, et al., Plaintiff, v. Apollo Roland Brokerage, Inc., et al.,
Under CPLR 214, a three-year statute of limitations is applicable in nonmedical malpractice
Put another way, given that malpractice is professional misfeasance toward one's client, who
The question arises in the context of insurance agents and brokers.
In the first case, Chase Scientific Research, Inc. v The NIA Group, Inc., plaintiff Chase, a
On January 7, 1999, plaintiff filed suit against defendants, asserting one cause of action
In the second case, Gugliotta v Apollo Roland Brokerage Inc., et al., defendant Apollo
plaintiff engaged attorneys Charles L. Emma and Harry Cardillo to defend the Fermin action.
While a malpractice action may be grounded in negligence -- subject generally to a three-year
When the Legislature amended CPLR 214 to apply a three-year limitations period to all
Causes of action for other professional misfeasance were governed by the three-year
, affd 240 NY 672; Hurlburt v Gillett, 96 Misc 585, affd 176 App Div 893).
In 1962, the Legislature replaced the two-year limitations period contained in Civil Practice
While the cases involved architects, lawyers and insurance brokers, no issue was raised --
While the term has myriad applications in law -- as, for example, in insurance policy
Nor does the law defining "professional" for other purposes necessarily resolve the statute
The two- and three-year malpractice statutes of limitation, after all, began with doctors,
Opinion by Chief Judge Kaye.
|
