From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martin v. Manhattan Bronx Surface Transit

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 23, 1993
198 A.D.2d 160 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

November 23, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas McKeon, J.).


It is not disputed that this personal injury action is based on an accident which took place on December 6, 1988, and that it was commenced on July 26, 1990, more than one year and 90 days later (see, Public Authorities Law § 1212). Defendant's claim that the action is time-barred was properly preserved as an affirmative defense in the first responsive pleading and then asserted as dispositive on the instant motion (see, Connell v Hayden, 83 A.D.2d 30, 32). Plaintiff's claim that defendant should be equitably estopped from asserting the defense of the Statute of Limitations is bottomed on facts dehors the record (see, American Express Bank v Uniroyal, Inc., 164 A.D.2d 275, 277-278, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 807), and raised for the first time on appeal (see, City of New York v Stack, 178 A.D.2d 355, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 753), and we do not consider it.

We have considered the plaintiff's remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Carro, Ellerin and Nardelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Martin v. Manhattan Bronx Surface Transit

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 23, 1993
198 A.D.2d 160 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Martin v. Manhattan Bronx Surface Transit

Case Details

Full title:JESSIE MARTIN, Appellant, v. MANHATTAN AND BRONX SURFACE TRANSIT OPERATING…

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

Date published: Nov 23, 1993

Citations

198 A.D.2d 160 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
604 N.Y.S.2d 65

Citing Cases

Varley v. Elk 300 E 83, LLC

Defendant merely sought a mutual understanding to determine which items in the portion of the unit needing…