Opinion
3977.
Decided June 22, 2004.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Rosalyn Richter, J.), entered April 16, 2003, which dismissed the complaint in its entirety, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Eleanor P. Vale, New York, for appellant.
Kelley Drye Warren, LLP, New York (Robert I. Steiner of counsel), for St. Vincent's Hospital, respondent.
Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman Dicker, LLP, White Plains (Katherine Hammond Galle of counsel), for Archdiocese of New York, respondent.
Biedermann, Hoenig, Massamillo Ruff, P.C., New York (Philip C. Semprevivo of counsel), for Sisters of Charity, respondent.
LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene MacRae, LLP, New York (William G. Primps of counsel), for The Bank of New York and Richard Pershan, respondents.
Before: Buckley, P.J., Tom, Saxe, Sullivan, Friedman, JJ.
The complaint was predicated on the same series of transactions and occurrences that formed the basis of prior proceedings brought by plaintiff and dismissed on statute of limitations grounds ( see McQuillan v. Magura, 233 A.D.2d 186, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 812; McQuillan v. Theresa Edward O'Toole Found., 151 A.D.2d 1057), thus warranting dismissal herein under the doctrine of res judicata. It does not avail plaintiff now to seek recovery ostensibly under a different theory, since both this and the previous claims arise from the same underlying transactions ( see O'Brien v. City of New York, 54 N.Y.2d 353; Tsabbar v. Delena, 300 A.D.2d 196, lv denied 100 N.Y.2d 508).
Plaintiff's fraud claims are also barred by the six-year statute of limitations (CPLR 213; 203[g]). The record conclusively establishes that plaintiff had knowledge of the alleged fraud for at least six years prior to commencement of the instant action ( see Rattner v. York, 174 A.D.2d 718; cf. Trepuk v. Frank, 44 N.Y.2d 723). Plaintiff was properly enjoined from initiating further litigation against these defendants without prior court approval in order to prevent her further use of the courts to harass and embarrass them ( Jones v. Maples, 286 A.D.2d 639, lv dismissed 97 N.Y.2d 716).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.