COASTAL BROADWAY ASSOCIATES v. Otterbourg, Steindler, Houston & Rosen, P.C., Defendant. (1998)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

COASTAL BROADWAY ASSOCIATES, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Stephen M. RAPHAEL, Defendant-Appellant, Otterbourg, Steindler, Houston & Rosen, P.C., Defendant.

Decided: January 22, 1998

Before MILONAS, J.P., and ROSENBERGER, WALLACH, WILLIAMS and MAZZARELLI, JJ.

Brian Bromberg,Peter Marc Stern, for Plaintiff-Respondent. Mark J. Bunim and Michael Ludwig, Robinson Silverman Pearce Aronsohn & Berman, L.L.P., for Defendent-Appellant.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Elliott Wilk, J.), entered July 10, 1997, which, in an action for legal malpractice, denied defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While amended CPLR 214(6) applies to actions, such as this, commenced after its September 4, 1996 effective date (Amateur Hockey Assn. v. Parson, 244 A.D.2d 222, 664 N.Y.S.2d 919) due process requires that plaintiff be given a reasonable period after September 4, 1996 to pursue a claim theretofore existing but immediately barred upon the immediately effective enactment of the amendment (see, Alston v. Transport Workers Union, 225 A.D.2d 424, 639 N.Y.S.2d 359). Based upon the record before us, we find that the commencement of the action five and a half months after September 4, 1996 was reasonable.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network