The motion court properly dismissed the amended complaint in its entirety, as all claims asserted are barred by the applicable statutes of limitations (see CPLR 3211[a][5]). Plaintiff's claims for breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, negligence, and breach of contract accrued no later than December 1991, when the second of the two bank accounts held at defendant bank was closed (see CPLR 203[a]). Hence, even giving plaintiff the benefit of the
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
GONIK v. ISRAEL DISCOUNT BANK OF NEW YORK
3993, 150057/09.
80 A.D.3d 437 (2011)
914 N.Y.S.2d 63
EMMANUELLE GONIK, Appellant, v. ISRAEL DISCOUNT BANK OF NEW YORK, Doing Business as IDB BANK, Respondent.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided January 4, 2011.
Decided January 4, 2011.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
