Konar v. Monro Muffler Shops of Rochester, Inc.
| Decision Date | 18 May 1967 |
| Citation | 280 N.Y.S.2d 812,28 A.D.2d 642 |
| Parties | Morris KONAR, Appellant, v. MONRO MUFFLER SHOPS OF ROCHESTER, INC., Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
MacFarlane, Harris, Martin, Kendall & Dutcher, D. F. Mousaw, Rochester, for appellant.
Goldstein, Goldman, Kessler & Underberg, Rochester, Andrew A. Goldman, New York City, for respondent.
Before WILLIAMS, P.J., and BASTOW, HENRY and MARSH, JJ.
The complaint contains two causes of action, one in negligence and the other for breach of implied warranty. It is alleged that defendant on March 12, 1963 made certain repairs to plaintiff's automobile and on April 5, 1963 the brakes on the vehicle failed, resulting in injury to third persons. Special Term erroneously held that the first cause of action accrued on the earlier date. 'There can be no doubt that a cause of action accrues only when the forces wrongfully put in motion produce injury.' (Schmidt v. Merchants Desp. Trans. Co., 270 N.Y. 287, 300, 200 N.E. 824, 827, 104 A.L.R. 450.) See also Durant v. Grange Silo Co., 12 A.D.2d 694, 207 N.Y.S.2d 691; Great American Indem. Co., 282 App.Div. 545, 125 N.Y.S.2d 147. In 1963 the six-year limitation on contract actions (Civil Practice Act, § 48(1)) and not the three-year limit on personal injuries resulting from negligence (Civil Practice Act, § 49(6)) was applicable to a claim for personal injuries arising from a breach of implied warranty. (Blessington v. McCrory Stores Corp., 305 N.Y. 140, 111 N.E.2d 421, 37 A.L.R.2d 698.) The limitation period of actions based on such a warranty as to transactions entered into and events occurring on and after September 27, 1964 is now governed by separate statutory provision. (Uniform Commercial Code §§ 2--725, 10--101, 10--105.)
Judgment and order unanimously reversed with costs, motion to dismiss affirmative defense granted, and cross-motion to grant summary judgment denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kelly v. City of Rochester
...Merchants Desp. Transp. Co., supra, 270 N.Y. p. 300, 200 N.E. 324)." (emphasis in original) (see also, Konar v. Monro Muffler Shops of Rochester, Inc., 28 A.D.2d 642, 280 N.Y.S.2d 812). The principle has been stated another way, i. e., the statute of limitations ordinarily does not start to......
-
Sexstone v. City of Rochester
...the time of the negligent act but from the date the negligent act produced injury to the plaintiffs. (Konar v. Monro Muffler Shops of Rochester, Inc., 28 A.D.2d 642, 280 N.Y.S.2d 812; Durant v. Grange Silo Company, 12 A.D.2d 694, 207 N.Y.S.2d Judgment and order dismissing complaint as to de......
-
Bort v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
...are sold and bought. * * * Proof of negligence is unnecessary for recovery in such a suit.' See also Konar v. Monro Muffler Shops of Rochester, Inc., 28 A.D.2d 642, 280 N.Y.S.2d 812; Rinaldi v. Mohican Co., 225 N.Y. 70, 121 N.E. Defendants' cited case of D'Amico v. Winkelman Co., 51 Misc.2d......