From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gilbert Props. v. Millstein

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Dec 27, 1973
33 N.Y.2d 857 (N.Y. 1973)

Opinion

Argued November 14, 1973

Decided December 27, 1973

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, BERNARD NADEL, J.

Richard Kaye and Harry Grossman for appellant.

Richard J. Burke and John E. Morris for respondent.


Order affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: Plaintiff client's cause of action against defendant attorney for malpractice accrued, at the latest, when the attorney-client relationship between them ended in 1966. (Cf., e.g., Borgia v. City of New York, 12 N.Y.2d 151, 155; Siegel v. Kranis, 29 A.D.2d 477, 480; see, also, Note, 18 ALR 3d 985 et seq.) Consequently, since the plaintiff's suit for malpractice was commenced in 1970, the determination of the Appellate Division that the plaintiff's action was time-barred by the three-year period of limitations (CPLR 203; CPLR 214, subd. 6), though based on an earlier date of accrual, should be affirmed.

Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, BREITEL, JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES and WACHTLER.


Summaries of

Gilbert Props. v. Millstein

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Dec 27, 1973
33 N.Y.2d 857 (N.Y. 1973)
Case details for

Gilbert Props. v. Millstein

Case Details

Full title:GILBERT PROPERTIES, INC., Appellant, v. JACOB A. MILLSTEIN, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Dec 27, 1973

Citations

33 N.Y.2d 857 (N.Y. 1973)
352 N.Y.S.2d 198
307 N.E.2d 257

Citing Cases

Muller v. Sturman

22a, 1980 Supp, p 69). When applied to attorney malpractice the principle is referred to as the "continuous…

Woodson v. American Tr. Ins. Co.

In determining the date of accrual, "[w]hat is important is when the malpractice was committed, not when the…