Newburgh School v. Stubbins

101 Citing cases

  1. Town of Oyster Bay v. Lizza Indus., Inc.

    2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 8370 (N.Y. 2013)   Cited 74 times   1 Legal Analyses

    In its lead decision, Village of Lindenhurst v. J.D. Posillico, Inc., 94 A.D.3d 1101, 943 N.Y.S.2d 553 (2d Dept.2012), the court held that, viewing the complaint as asserting the Village's rights as a third-party beneficiary to the sewer construction contract, “the action is barred by the six-year statute of limitations for a cause of action alleging breach of contract” (94 A.D.3d at 1102, 943 N.Y.S.2d 553). Noting the rule from City School Dist. of City of Newburgh v. Stubbins & Assoc., 85 N.Y.2d 535, 626 N.Y.S.2d 741, 650 N.E.2d 399 (1995)( Newburgh ) that a cause of action arising out of defective construction accrues upon completion of the contractual work, the court stated that this rule applies to actions commenced by a third-party beneficiary to the contract ( see id.). The court also rejected the Village's argument that “the conduct giving rise to the alleged nuisance is ongoing, thereby giving rise to successive causes of action” ( id.).

  2. Royal Ins. Co. of America v. Ru-Val Elec.

    918 F. Supp. 647 (E.D.N.Y. 1996)   Cited 13 times
    Relying on the Restatement (Second) of Agency in determining whether an entity was an employee or independent contractor in a tort case

    A contract claim generally accrues at the time of the breach, not when the injury is sustained. City Sch. Dist. of Newburgh v. Stubbins Associates, 85 N.Y.2d 535, 538, 626 N.Y.S.2d 741, 742-43, 650 N.E.2d 399, 400-401 (1995); Bulova Watch Co. v. Celotex Corp., 46 N.Y.2d 606, 610, 415 N.Y.S.2d 817, 819, 389 N.E.2d 130 (1979). Plaintiff's knowledge of the breach is not necessary for the statute to start running.

  3. Town of Oyster Bay v. Lizza Indus., Inc.

    2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 8370 (N.Y. 2013)

    In its lead decision, Village of Lindenhurst v J.D. Posillico, Inc. (94 AD3d 1101 [2d Dept 2012]), the court held that, viewing the complaint as asserting the Village's rights as a third-party beneficiary to the sewer construction contract, "the action is barred by the six-year statute of limitations for a cause of action alleging breach of contract" (94 AD3d at 1102). Noting the rule from City School District of City of Newburgh v Stubbins & Associates (85 NY2d 535 [1995]) ("Newburgh") that a cause of action arising out of defective construction accrues upon completion of the contractual work, the court stated that this rule applies to actions commenced by a third-party beneficiary to the contract (see id.). The court also rejected the Village's argument that "the conduct giving rise to the alleged nuisance is ongoing, thereby giving rise to successive causes of action" (id.).

  4. Town of W. Seneca v. Kideney Architects, P.C.

    187 A.D.3d 1509 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)   Cited 15 times

    We reject that contention. A claim against an architect accrues upon the completion of performance (seeTown of Oyster Bay v. Lizza Indus., Inc. , 22 N.Y.3d 1024, 1030, 981 N.Y.S.2d 643, 4 N.E.3d 944 [2013], rearg denied 23 N.Y.3d 934, 986 N.Y.S.2d 877, 10 N.E.3d 187 [2014] ; City School Dist. of City of Newburgh v. Stubbins & Assoc. , 85 N.Y.2d 535, 538, 626 N.Y.S.2d 741, 650 N.E.2d 399 [1995] ). "This rule applies ‘no matter how a claim is characterized in the complaint’ because ‘all liability’ for defective construction ‘has its genesis in the contractual relationship of the parties’ " ( Lizza Indus., Inc. , 22 N.Y.3d at 1030, 981 N.Y.S.2d 643, 4 N.E.3d 944, quoting City School Dist. of City of Newburgh , 85 N.Y.2d at 538, 626 N.Y.S.2d 741, 650 N.E.2d 399 ). "Even if the plaintiff is not a party to the underlying construction contract, the claim may accrue upon completion of the construction where the plaintiff is not a ‘stranger to the contract,’ and the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant is the ‘functional equivalent of privity’ " ( id. , quoting City School Dist. of City of Newburgh , 85 N.Y.2d at 538-539, 626 N.Y.S.2d 741, 650 N.E.2d 399 ). Despite the lack of privity between plaintiff and defendant, plaintiff was "not a stranger to the contract" ( City School Dist. of City of Newburgh , 85 N.Y.2d at 538, 626 N.Y.S.2d 741, 650 N.E.2d 399 ).

  5. Stapleton v. Barrett Crane Design & Eng'g

    17-657-cv (2d Cir. Feb. 20, 2018)   Cited 19 times
    Concluding that district court did not abuse its discretion for refusing to consider third-party beneficiary argument, raised in an opposition to summary judgment when complaint had only pled a privity theory of recovery

    Town of Oyster Bay v. Lizza Indus., Inc., 4 N.E.3d 944, 948 (N.Y. 2013) (quoting City Sch. Dist. of City of Newburgh v. Hugh Stubbins & Assocs., Inc., 650 N.E.2d 399, 401 (N.Y. 1995)). New York similarly limits professional negligence claims to situations where the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant is either "one of privity of contract, or . . . the bond between them [is] so close as to be the functional equivalent of privity."

  6. Lanzalaco v. United Subcontractors, Inc.

    201 A.D.3d 713 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)

    The Supreme Court granted the motions, and the plaintiffs appeal. " ‘In cases against architects or contractors, the accrual date for Statute of Limitations purposes is completion of performance’ " ( Town of Oyster Bay v. Lizza Indus., Inc., 22 N.Y.3d 1024, 1030, 981 N.Y.S.2d 643, 4 N.E.3d 944, quoting City School Dist. of City of Newburgh v. Stubbins & Assoc., 85 N.Y.2d 535, 538, 626 N.Y.S.2d 741, 650 N.E.2d 399 ). "This rule applies ‘no matter how a claim is characterized in the complaint’ because ‘all liability’ for defective construction ‘has its genesis in the contractual relationship of the parties’ " ( Town of Oyster Bay v. Lizza Indus., Inc., 22 N.Y.3d at 1030, 981 N.Y.S.2d 643, 4 N.E.3d 944, quoting City School Dist. of City of Newburgh v. Stubbins & Assoc., 85 N.Y.2d at 538, 626 N.Y.S.2d 741, 650 N.E.2d 399 ). "Even if the plaintiff is not a party to the underlying construction contract, the claim may accrue upon completion of the construction where the plaintiff is not a ‘stranger to the contract,’ and the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant is the ‘functional equivalent of privity’ " ( Town of Oyster Bay v. Lizza Indus., Inc., 22 N.Y.3d at 1030, 981 N.Y.S.2d 643, 4 N.E.3d 944, quoting City School Dist. of City of Newburgh v. Stubbins & Assoc., 85 N.Y.2d at 538–539, 626 N.Y.S.2d 741, 650 N.E.2d 399 ). Here, each defendant demonstrated its prima facie entitlement to

  7. Vill. of Lindenhurst v. J.D. Posillico, Inc.

    94 A.D.3d 1101 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)   Cited 17 times

    Alternatively, viewing the complaint as an attempt by the Village to recharacterize, under a theory of nuisance, its rights as an alleged third-party beneficiary to the sewer construction contract ( see e.g. Town of Islip v. Zara & Sons Contr. Co., 207 A.D.2d 339, 340, 615 N.Y.S.2d 428; Town of Babylon v. Lizza Indus., 191 A.D.2d 425, 426, 593 N.Y.S.2d 1001), the action is barred by the six-year statute of limitations for a cause of action alleging breach of contract ( see Town of Islip v. H.T. Schneider Assoc., 73 A.D.3d 1029, 1029–1030, 901 N.Y.S.2d 378; see also City School Dist. of City of Newburgh v. Stubbins & Assoc., 85 N.Y.2d 535, 538, 626 N.Y.S.2d 741, 650 N.E.2d 399). “[N]o matter how a claim is characterized in the complaint—negligence, malpractice, breach of contract—an owner's claim arising out of defective construction accrues on date of completion, since all liability has its genesis in the contractual relationship of the parties” ( City School Dist. of City of Newburgh v. Stubbins & Assoc., 85 N.Y.2d at 538, 626 N.Y.S.2d 741, 650 N.E.2d 399). This rule applies to actions alleging breach of contract commenced by a third-party beneficiary to the contract ( id. at 538–539, 626 N.Y.S.2d 741, 650 N.E.2d 399; see Town of Islip v. H.T. Schneider Assoc., 73 A.D.3d at 1030, 901 N.Y.S.2d 378).

  8. Lanzalaco v. United Subcontractors, Inc.

    2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 172 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2022)

    "'In cases against architects or contractors, the accrual date for Statute of Limitations purposes is completion of performance'" (Town of Oyster Bay v Lizza Indus., Inc., 22 N.Y.3d 1024, 1030, quoting City School Dist. of City of Newburgh v Stubbins & Assoc, 85 N.Y.2d 535, 538). "This rule applies 'no matter how a claim is characterized in the complaint' because 'all liability' for defective construction 'has its genesis in the contractual relationship of the parties'" (Town of Oyster Bay v Lizza Indus., Inc., 22 N.Y.3d at 1030, quoting City School Dist. of City of Newburgh v Stubbins & Assoc, 85 N.Y.2d at 538).

  9. Brown v. Deck

    2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 30337 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2016)

    In making this argument, the defendants rely on two Court of Appeals decisions which were cited in their original papers. See City School District of Newburgh v. Hugh Stubbins & Associates, Inc., 85 N.Y.2d 535 (1995); Cabrini Medical Centerv. Desina, 64 N.Y.2d 1059 (1985). However, these cases are completely inapplicable to the present case.

  10. Media Glow Digital, LLC v. Panasonic Corp.

    16 Civ. 7907 (JFK)(HBP) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 6, 2019)

    See Town of Oyster Bay v. Lizza Indus., Inc., 22 N.Y.3d 1024, 1030, 4 N.E.3d 944, 948, 981 N.Y.S.2d 643, 647 (2013) ("Even if the plaintiff is not a party to an underlying construction contract, [a breach of contract] claim may accrue upon completion of the construction where the plaintiff is not a 'stranger to the contract,' and the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant is the functional equivalent of privity."); City Sch. Dist. of City of Newburgh v. Hugh Stubbins & Assocs., 85 N.Y.2d 535, 539, 650 N.E.2d 399, 401, 626 N.Y.S.2d 741, 742 (1995); see also Stapleton v. Pavilion Building Installation Sys., supra, 2017 WL 431801 at *3 (this "limited exception is sometimes applicable in cases . . . where the owner of a property sues . . . a subcontractor with whom it had no direct contractual relationship"); Aktas v. JMC Dev. Co., 877 F. Supp. 2d 1, 27 (N.D.N.Y. 2012), aff'd, 563 F. App'x 79 (2d Cir. 2014).