This piece summarizes three significant civil procedure decisions handed down by the New York Court of Appeals during its 2016-2017 term. Given our space limitations, and the length of some of the Court's important decisions, we have addressed only a portion of the holdings in this arena. There is something here for both the personal injury lawyer and the commercial litigator alike, with an emphasis on those decisions that are most relevant to everyday practice in the Empire State. Readers searching for a discussion of other recent developments in New York civil practice, including decisions from various other courts, will want to review the biannual supplement to Siegel, New York Practice (Thomson, Connors ed., January 2017 Supplement).

Court of Appeals Does Not Allow Apportionment of State's Fault in Supreme Court Action.

Two critical and complicated aspects of New York civil procedure clashed in Artibee v. Home Place, 28 N.Y.3d 739 (2017): court of claims jurisdiction and CPLR Article 16. In Artibee, plaintiffs sued defendant in supreme court for injuries sustained while driving on a state highway after a branch from defendant's tree fell and struck plaintiff's car. Plaintiff also sued the state of New York in the court of claims. This type of scenario, in which a plaintiff must commence two separate actions in two different courts to ensure a proper recovery, presents a whole host of procedural problems including jurisdictional issues, the possibility of inconsistent findings of fact, and the apportionment of fault between potentially responsible parties who are not before the court. See Siegel, New York Practice §17 (West 5th ed. 2011).