Andrea v. Arnone, Hedin, Casker, Kennedy and Drake, Architects and Landscape Architects
New York Court of Appeals
5 N.Y.3d 514, 806 N.Y.S.2d 453, 840 N.E.2d 565 (2005)
- Written by Steven Pacht, JD
Facts
In 1994 and 1995, more than 60 employees and students at the Jefferson Middle School sued (original suits) more than 20 parties, including Arnone, Hedin, Casker, Kennedy and Drake, Architects and Landscape Architects, P.C. (Arnone), that were involved with renovations at the school, alleging that the employees and students were exposed to toxic substances during the renovations. Between 1996 and May 2000, the employees and students repeatedly failed to meet their discovery obligations on an ongoing basis. The supreme court denied motions to dismiss the complaints due to the discovery violations in December 1996 and July 1999 before finally dismissing the complaints on that basis in May 2000. The appellate division affirmed; no appeal was taken. In December 2000, Cheryl Andrea, along with 33 other plaintiffs in the original suits (plaintiffs) (collectively, Andrea), filed a new suit against Arnone and 12 of the other defendants in the original suits (collectively, renovating parties) (collectively, defendants). The renovating parties moved to dismiss the second suit on statute-of-limitations grounds. The supreme court denied the motions, relying on Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) § 205(a), which provided that a plaintiff could file a new suit within six months of the termination of a timely filed prior suit unless the original suit was dismissed for, among other things, neglect to prosecute the action. Per the supreme-court judge, the judge did not intend his May 2000 dismissals of the original suits to have been for neglect to prosecute, and thus the second suit was timely pursuant to § 205(a). The appellate division reversed. Andrea appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Smith, R. S., J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.


