From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Perez v. Moshulu Footcare

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 18, 2003
1 A.D.3d 209 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2220

November 18, 2003.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kenneth Thompson, J.), entered on or about May 16, 2002, which granted defendants' motion to dismiss the action as time-barred, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Tania M. Pagan, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Before: Saxe, J.P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Friedman, Gonzalez, JJ.


This action for podiatric malpractice, commenced in November 1999, was properly dismissed as time-barred in light of testimonial and documentary evidence indicating that plaintiff was last treated by defendant doctor in October 1996 (see CPLR 214-a). Although plaintiff contends that her treatment with defendant continued beyond that date, the record does not contain evidence probative of that contention, much less that the claimed treatment continued sufficiently long to come within the statutory period (see e.g. De Peralta v. Presbyterian Hosp., 121 A.D.2d 346).

We have considered plaintiffs' remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Perez v. Moshulu Footcare

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 18, 2003
1 A.D.3d 209 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Perez v. Moshulu Footcare

Case Details

Full title:MARINA PEREZ, ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. MOSHULU FOOTCARE, ET AL.…

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

Date published: Nov 18, 2003

Citations

1 A.D.3d 209 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
767 N.Y.S.2d 221