Opinion
February 2, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Floyd, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The Supreme Court properly dismissed the appellant former husband's cause of action for the imposition of a constructive trust, which is governed by a six-year Statute of Limitations ( see, CPLR 213, Loengard v. Santa Fe Indus., 70 N.Y.2d 262; Lucci v. Lucci, 227 A.D.2d 387; Matter of Wallace, 191 A.D.2d 638). Whether the appellant contends that the former wife wrongfully acquired fee ownership of the subject premises by improperly entering a divorce judgment and recording a deed executed by him in connection with the divorce, or that she thereafter wrongly withheld an ownership interest in the property from him despite their alleged reconciliation, the cause of action to impose a constructive trust on the property accrued in 1979 when all of these events occurred ( see generally, Sitkowski v. Petzing, 175 A.D.2d 801). Accordingly, the appellant's assertion of this claim in 1995 clearly was untimely ( see, e.g., Matter of Lupoli, 237 A.D.2d 440; Bevilacqua v. Bevilacqua, 233 A.D.2d 471).
In any event, the appellant concedes that he knowingly acquiesced in the transfer of the property to his former wife, and he has neither alleged nor established the requisite elements for the imposition of a constructive trust ( see, Doria v. Masucci, 230 A.D.2d 764; Copland v. Summ, 228 A.D.2d 409).
Sullivan, J. P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Florio, JJ., concur.