From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ryder v. Tannenbaum

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Apr 30, 1987
137 Misc. 2d 326 (N.Y. App. Term 1987)

Opinion

April 30, 1987

Appeal from the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, William Ritholtz, J.

Crudo Crudo, P.C. (Alexander J. Crudo of counsel), for appellant.


MEMORANDUM.

Judgment affirmed, without costs.

We are in accord with the view expressed by the court below that for Statute of Limitations purposes a claim is interposed at the time the claimant pays the filing and mailing fees and not at the time the notice is served upon the defendant. We note that CPLR 203 (b) concerns claims in complaints and is not applicable to the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court. Although we agree with the appellant that the payment of the filing fee does not confer jurisdiction over her, nevertheless, such act is sufficient to stop the running of the Statute of Limitations.

KASSOFF, P.J., MONTELEONE and LERNER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Ryder v. Tannenbaum

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Apr 30, 1987
137 Misc. 2d 326 (N.Y. App. Term 1987)
Case details for

Ryder v. Tannenbaum

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM H. RYDER, Respondent, v. RUTH TANNENBAUM, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department

Date published: Apr 30, 1987

Citations

137 Misc. 2d 326 (N.Y. App. Term 1987)
524 N.Y.S.2d 321

Citing Cases

Cohen v. Banks

It is plain that the original certified mailing on August 24, 1993, without more, failed to bring about…