2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 5200 (N.Y. 2009) Cited 246 times
Holding that language in an escrow agreement stating that contract documents were not to be released “unless and until” a party executed and agreed to a deal on terms outlined in the agreement was an express condition precedent
Holding that "although [defendant-]appellant’s Statute of Limitations argument fails, [its] contention that the [plaintiff] did not exercise reasonable diligence in locating the painting" is relevant "in the context of laches defense"
Noting that, ordinarily, the statute of limitations would apply to claims asserted against newly added parties who have "been a complete stranger to the suit up to the point of the requested amendment," but acknowledging that permitting the amendment to relate back to that defendant would not be at odds with the policies underlying the statute of limitations where "within the statutory period, . . . defendant is fully aware that a claim is being made against him with respect to the transaction or occurrence involved in the suit"