QUESTION OF FACT WHETHER DOCTRINE OF EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL PRECLUDED STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS DEFENSE, CRITERIA EXPLAINED.
The Second Department determined plaintiff raised a question of fact whether the doctrine of equitable estoppel precluded defendants’ statute of limitations defense. The court explained the criteria:
The doctrine of equitable estoppel will preclude a defendant from asserting the statute of limitations as a defense ” where it is the defendant’s affirmative wrongdoing . . . which produced the long delay between the accrual of the cause of action and the institution of the legal proceeding'” … . A plaintiff seeking to invoke the doctrine of equitable estoppel must “establish that subsequent and specific actions by defendants somehow kept [the plaintiff] from timely bringing suit” … . “Equitable estoppel is appropriate where the plaintiff is prevented from filing an action within the applicable statute of limitations due to his or her reasonable reliance on deception, fraud or misrepresentations by the defendant” … . Where the defendant has a fiduciary duty to the plaintiff, the doctrine of equitable estoppel may be invoked based on the defendant’s failure to disclose facts underlying the claim … . North Coast Outfitters, Ltd. v Darling, 2015 NY Slip Op 09409, 2nd Dept 12-23-15
CIVIL PROCEDURE (EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL DOCTRINE EXPLAINED)/EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL (CRITERIA EXPLAINED)