Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Citation
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Parent Document
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 2018-06-20
Other Sections in This Document (15)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
- Garron v. Bristol House, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 4533 (2018)
Full Text
1,126 chars"In seeking to assert the statute of limitations as a bar to a claim, a moving defendant bears the initial burden of demonstrating, prima facie, that the time within which to commence the cause of action has expired" (Collins Bros. Moving Corp. v Pierleoni, 155 AD3d 601, 603; see Stein Indus., Inc. v Certilman Balin Adler & Hyman, LLP, 149 AD3d 788, 789). Here, the defendants established, prima facie, that the alleged damage occurred when the renovations were performed in November 2004, and that the commencement of this action on April 15, 2016, was beyond the six-year statute of limitations applicable to causes of action for breach of contract or breach of the implied warranty of habitability (see CPLR 213[2]; Roman v Emigrant Sav. Bank-Brooklyn/Queens, 111 AD3d 692, 694; Witherbee Ct. Assoc. v Greene, 7 AD3d 699, 701). Accordingly, the burden shifted to the plaintiff to raise a question of fact as to whether the statute of limitations is tolled or is otherwise inapplicable (see Collins Bros. Moving Corp. v Pierleoni, 155 AD3d at 603; Stein Indus., Inc. v Certilman Balin Adler & Hyman, LLP, 149 AD3d at 789).