You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Donaldson Acoustics, Inc. v. New York Institute of Technology

Citations: 249 A.D.2d 391; 671 N.Y.S.2d 114; 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3971

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; April 13, 1998; New York; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case, Donaldson Acoustics, Inc. sought to permanently stay arbitration initiated by the New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) under a CPLR Article 75 proceeding. The dispute arose from a contract for construction work completed by Donaldson in March 1990, with final payment received in August 1990. NYIT demanded arbitration in May 1996, claiming a breach of contract. Donaldson contended that this demand was barred by the Statute of Limitations. According to New York law, the court is responsible for determining whether a claim is time-barred, and the statute of limitations for construction contract claims is six years from the completion of construction. Since NYIT's demand was made more than six years after the project was completed, the court concluded it was time-barred. Consequently, the Supreme Court of Nassau County's earlier decision was reversed, Donaldson’s petition was granted, and the arbitration was permanently stayed. The decision was supported by the concurrence of Justices Mangano, Miller, Pizzuto, and Krausman.

Legal Issues Addressed

Arbitration Stay under CPLR Article 75

Application: The court granted a permanent stay of arbitration due to the expiration of the Statute of Limitations.

Reasoning: The Supreme Court of Nassau County's order, which denied Donaldson Acoustics, Inc.'s motion for a stay on the basis of the Statute of Limitations and granted the New York Institute of Technology's (NYIT) motion to dismiss, has been reversed.

Judicial Determination of Time-Barred Claims

Application: The court has the authority to decide whether a claim is time-barred in proceedings under CPLR Article 75.

Reasoning: New York law dictates that whether a claim is time-barred is a question for the court in such proceedings.

Statute of Limitations in Construction Contract Claims

Application: The court determined that the arbitration demand was time-barred as the claim was initiated more than six years after the accrual date, which is the completion of construction.

Reasoning: The applicable limitations period for construction contract claims is six years, with the accrual date set at the completion of construction.