In Rodriguez v. Central Parking System of New York, Inc. , Adriano Rodriguez filed suit to recover the value of a car that had been stolen from one of Central Parking System 's parking garages.
Inexplicably, Rodriguez waited more than three years to start the litigation. As a result, Central Parking System filed a motion to dismiss the case, claiming Rodriguez was barred by a three-year "statute of limitations" -- a state law requiring such cases to be started within a delineated timeframe or the underlying claims are forever lost.
Believing that Rodriguez had 6 years to sue, the Civil Court of the City of New York denied the motion. On appeal, the Appellate Term, First Department, agreed and found that "[a]n action for failure to exercise due care in the performance of a contract, where the plaintiff seeks damages for injury to property or pecuniary interests, is governed by the six-year" limitations period.
While the AT1 conceded that it had previously applied a three-year period to cases of this type, it noted that the Court of Appeals -- our state's highest court --"'has refused to apply a shortened negligence statute of limitations to a claim seeking breach-of-contract damages on a claim for property damages.'"
With that, the AT1 bailed out of this case … fast.
To download a copy of the Appellate Term's decision, please use this link: Rodriguez v. Central Parking System of New York, Inc.