Judges and legal commentators have spilled much ink trying to explain the applications and limitations of the four year rule of RSL §26-516(a) (also codified in CPLR 213-a) (the Four Year Rule). On Oct. 19, 2010, a split Court of Appeals in Grimm v. N.Y. State Division of Housing & Community Renewal, et al.,1 made one more attempt.
The purpose of this article is to survey the relevant legal precedent discussing the judicial exceptions to the Four Year Rule, note the patterns, and then formulate a cogent conclusion to assist in predicting under which circumstances the Four Year Rule will apply, and under which circumstances its exceptions will apply.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
