From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Klein v. Conte

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 2, 1995
212 A.D.2d 363 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

February 2, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Arber, J.).


In this action to recover the purchase price of 50% of the stock of a corporation that was to be paid through a differential in the weekly salaries paid by the corporation to the parties, plaintiff seller's cause of action accrued one week after execution of the contract, plaintiff never having received any such weekly payments, and is thus barred by the six-year Statute of Limitations (CPLR 213). Given the specification for weekly payments, there is no merit to plaintiff's argument that the Statute of Limitations should be tolled indefinitely in the absence of a specified time limit for making full payment.

We have considered plaintiff's other arguments and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Wallach, J.P., Rubin, Kupferman and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

Klein v. Conte

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 2, 1995
212 A.D.2d 363 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Klein v. Conte

Case Details

Full title:HOWARD KLEIN, Appellant, v. THOMAS CONTE, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Feb 2, 1995

Citations

212 A.D.2d 363 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
622 N.Y.S.2d 248

Citing Cases

Kopel v. Bandwidth

The causes of action for breach of contract, conversion and breach of fiduciary duty are barred by the…

Davis v. Cornerstone Telephone Co.

Affording plaintiff the benefit of every possible inference, we agree that the complaint, when considered…