Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Pursuant to the unambiguous terms of the agreement between the petitioner and appellant, the applicable Statute of Limitations began to run upon "substantial completion" of the project. Contrary to the appellant's contention, the Supreme Court correctly found that substantial completion of the project occurred no later than May 1994, when the premises was occupied for its intended use (see, State of New York v Lundin...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.