Opinion
June 23, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garry, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.
The Supreme Court correctly dismissed the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendants Dell Computer Corporation (hereinafter Dell) and Brother International Corporation as time-barred, where the injured plaintiff's symptoms of repetitive stress injury occurred more than three years previous to the commencement of this action ( see, CPLR 214; Badillo v International Bus. Machs. Corp., 237 A.D.2d 553; Hayes v International Bus. Machs. Corp., 237 A.D.2d 254). Moreover, the complaint, insofar as asserted against Dell, fails to state a cause of action, where the plaintiff Audrey Hartman's injuries occurred more than three years previous to her use of Dell's products ( see, Edmond v. International Bus. Machs. Corp., 238 A.D.2d 303).
Bracken, J.P., Thompson, Goldstein and Luciano, JJ., concur.