Equitable estoppel.

Practice point: To estop the assertion of a statute of limitations defense, plaintiff must establish by clear and convincing evidence that the action was not timely commenced because of defendant’s fraud, deception or misrepresentation.

Practitioners should note that the statute will not be tolled when plaintiff failed to plead either fraud or fraudulent concealment, but only alleged medical malpractice based on defendant's failure to appreciate the information contained in a radiology report.

Case: Bayuk v. Gilbert, NY Slip Op 09460 (1st Dept. 2008)

The opinion is here.

Corporations.

Practice point: A corporation must appear by an attorney, pursuant to CPLR 321(a).

Practitioners should note that, to avoid the statutory requirement, the corporation may assign its claims to an appropriate individual plaintiff.

Case: Kinlay v. Henley, NY Slip Op 09450 (1st Dept. 2008)

The opinion is here.

Negligence.

Practice point: Deposition testimony that the floor on which plaintiff slipped was "very shiny" and "overwaxed," without more, does not support an inference of negligent waxing or polishing.

Practitioners should note that no inference of negligence can be drawn from the fact that, after plaintiff fell, a carpet and a warning sign were placed on the floor.

Case: Purcell v. York Bldg. Maintenance Corp., NY Slip Op 09439 (1st Dept. 2008)

The opinion is here.

Right of way.

Practice point: A driver facing a red flashing light must stop before entering the intersection, pursuant to Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1113(a), and then proceed according to the rules applicable after stopping at a stop sign. A driver who fails to yield the right-of-way after stopping at a stop sign is in violation of § 1142(a), and is negligent as a matter of law.

Practitioners should note that a driver with the right-of-way is entitled to anticipate that others will obey the applicable traffic laws and yield the right-of-way.

Case: Melendez v. County of Nassau, NY Slip Op 09367 (2d Dept. 2008)

The opinion is here.

Trivial defects.

Practice point: Injuries resulting from trivial defects are not actionable.

Practitioners should note that there is no 'minimal dimension test' or per se rule that, in order to be actionable, a defect must be of a certain height or depth. Instead, a court will consider the width, depth, elevation, irregularity and appearance of the defect, along with the time, place and circumstance of the injury.

Case: Berry v. Rocking Horse Ranch Corp., NY Slip Op 09342 (2d Dept. 2008)

The opinion is here.

Pleadings.

Practice point: An answer to an amended complaint served pursuant to CPLR 3025(d) constitutes an original answer to the amended complaint, and affirmative defenses raised in that answer are not limited to those which had been asserted in the original answer.

Practitioners should note that a plaintiff cannot avoid the application of this rule by simply denominating a pleading as supplemental when, in fact, it asserts new injuries and a new category of damages, and which, therefore, is an amended pleading.

Practitioners should further note that a supplemental complaint does not supersede the original complaint, but is in addition to it, and the original answer remains in effect. In its answer to the supplemental complaint, a defendant may not assert a new affirmative defense unless it is responsive to the new matter alleged.

Case: Mendrzycki v. Cricchio, NY Slip Op 09044 (2d Dept. 2008)

The opinion is here.

Rear-end collisions.

Practice point: A rear-end collision with a stopped or braking vehicle creates a prima facie case of the moving vehicle driver’s negligence, and requires the driver to offer an adequate non-negligent explanation for the accident.

Practitioners should note that, standing alone, a claim that the driver ahead stopped suddenly does not defeat the presumption of negligence. However, evidence that a vehicle was rear-ended and propelled into the stopped vehicle in front of it may provide a sufficient non-negligent explanation, pursuant to Malak v. Wynder, NY Slip Op 09043 (2d Dept. 2008).

Case: Jumandeo v. Franks, NY Slip Op 09035 (2d Dept. 2008)

The opinion is here.

Privileged communications.

Practice point: An attorney may reveal confidences or secrets when their publication is necessary to defend against an accusation of wrongful conduct, pursuant to DR 4-101(C).

Practitioners should note that the rule may apply to allegations of malpractice and does not require an allegation of conduct rising to the level of criminality, pursuant to Restatement [Third] of Law Governing Lawyers § 64, Comment c.

Case: Hélie v. McDermott, Will & Emery, NY Slip Op 09289 (1st Dept. 2008)

The opinion is here.

Statute of limitations.

Practice point: The statute of limitations cannot be asserted sua sponte by the court as a basis for denying an unopposed motion for a default judgment.

Practitioners should note that the statute of limitations must be pleaded, if at all, as an affirmative defense.

Case: Orix Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Haynes, NY Slip Op 09270 (1st Dept. 2008)

The opinion is here.

Cooperatives Law.

Practice point: Absent evidence of self-dealing, fraud or some other breach of fiduciary duty, a shareholder will not defeat the business judgment rule in disputing a coop board's decisions regarding repairs to the building.

Practitioners should note that, by refusing to pay assessments for major structural repairs, a plaintiff waives the claim for breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment.

Case: Parker v. Marglin, NY Slip Op 09266 (1st Dept. 2008)

The opinion is here.

Disclosure.

Practice point: Pursuant to CPLR 3101(a), there must be full disclosure of whatever is material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action.

Practitioners should note that "material and necessary" is interpreted liberally to require disclosure of anything which bears on the controversy and which will help to sharpen the issues and reduce delays. The standard is usefulness and reason.

Case: Friel v. Papa, NY Slip Op 09028 (2d Dept. 2008)

The opinion is here.