Recitation, as required by CPLR §2219 (a), of the papers considered in the review of this Motion Papers Numbered Notice of Motion and Affidavits Annexed 1 Order to Show Cause Answering Affidavits 2 Replying Affidavits Exhibits Supplemental Affidavit DECISION/ORDER Upon the foregoing papers, defendant’s motion for dismissal, pursuant to CPLR §3211, is decided as follows: Claimant, an orthopedic surgeon, commenced an action seeking to recover $8,446.65 for “Failure to pay for services rendered…from 04/11/2018.” The services were rendered for Manual Torres, who was a personal injury client of the defendant law firm. Defendant brought a motion to dismiss on the basis of statute of limitation, in particular CPLR §213-d, “An action on a medical debt by a hospital licensed under article 28 of the public health law or a health care professional authorized under title 8 of the education law shall be commenced within three years of treatment.” This statute became effective on April 3, 2020. Claimant opposes this argument on the basis that there is a six year statute of limitations for breach of contract, Fallati v. Concord Pools, Ltd., 151 A.D. 3d 1446 (3rd Dept. 2017). Defendant argues that the change of the statute of limitations should be applied retroactively, stating this is a statute governing a procedural issue. Defendant cites State of New York v. Mason, 78 Misc. 3d 437 (Sup. Ct. Suffolk Co. 2023). It is fundamental that a court interpreting a statute should attempt to effectuate the intent of the Legislative. The clearest indicator of the legislative intent must always be the language itself. It is a fundamental canon of statutory construction that retroactive operation is not favored by the courts, Majewski v. Broadalbin-Perth Central School District, 91 N.Y. 2d 577 (1998). In plain language, if the Legislature intended that this statute of limitation change should be applied retroactively, then it would have so stated. Defendant’s motion to dismiss is denied. This case has already been adjourned to April 9, 2025 at 6:00 p.m.. This constitutes the decision and order of the Court. Dated: December 9, 2024
