City school construction authority brought professional malpractice action against architect concerning alleged faulty design of custom etched-glass windows.
The Supreme Court, New York County, granted architect’s motion to dismiss on statute of limitations grounds. Authority appealed.
The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, held that:
- Authority’s professional malpractice claim against architect accrued, and three-year statute of limitations period began to run, when architect completed its performance of significant, non-ministerial, duties under the parties’ contract, and
- Continuous representation doctrine tolled three-year statute of limitations period.
City school construction authority’s professional malpractice claim against architect accrued, and three-year statute of limitations period began to run, when architect completed its performance of significant, non-ministerial, duties under the parties’ contract.
Continuous representation doctrine tolled three-year statute of limitations period for city school construction authority to bring action against architect for professional malpractice regarding allegedly faulty design of custom etched-glass windows. Architect attempted to remedy faulty design of custom etched-glass windows within three years of action being commenced.