From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kleila v. Bell Helmets, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 5, 1995
216 A.D.2d 272 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

June 5, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brucia, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In granting the defendant's prior motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 327, the Supreme Court prohibited the defendant from raising the Statute of Limitations as a defense "in an action promptly commenced hereafter in the State of Tennessee". The plaintiff commenced a new action approximately three years later in a Federal District Court in California. Since the plaintiff's new action was neither promptly commenced nor commenced in Tennessee, the defendant did not violate the terms of the Supreme Court's order by raising the Statute of Limitations defense in the Federal action in California. Thus, we reject the plaintiff's contention that the action should be restored to the Supreme Court's calendar. Balletta J.P., Thompson, Santucci, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Kleila v. Bell Helmets, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 5, 1995
216 A.D.2d 272 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Kleila v. Bell Helmets, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE J. KLEILA, Appellant, v. BELL HELMETS, INC., Respondent

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

Date published: Jun 5, 1995

Citations

216 A.D.2d 272 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
627 N.Y.S.2d 762