Case ID: ny3d_8/html/0901-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[865 NE2d 1240, 834 NYS2d 74]
    Jenna Lynn Pahlad, an Infant, by the Appointed Guardian of Her Properties, Daniel Berger, et al., Appellants, v Lois Brustman, M.D., et al., Respondents.
    Decided March 27, 2007
    
      APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      Benjamin Heinrich, P.C., Bronx (Benjamin Heinrich of counsel), for appellants.
    
      Aaronson Rappaport Feinstein & Deutsch, LLP, New York City (Steven C. Mandell of counsel), for respondents.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed with costs. Plaintiffs had “timely awareness of the facts requiring [them] to make farther inquiry before the statute of limitations expired,” and an equitable estoppel defense to the statute of limitations is therefore “inappropriate as a matter of law” (see Putter v North Shore Univ. Hosp., 7 NY3d 548, 553-554 [2006]).

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.