
Pre-answer motions to dismiss for untimeliness are exceptionally common in business divorce litigation. Statute of limitations analysis can be deceptively simple in theory, but elusively difficult in practice, even for veteran judges. Identifying the applicable statute of limitations is just one of three steps a court must perform as part of its decision making process:
- What’s the applicable statute of limitations?
- What’s the accrual date of the claim?
- Are there any applicable tolls or equitable exceptions?
A recent decision from the Albany-based Appellate Division – Third Department, Lambos v Karabinis (___ AD3d ___, 2025 NY Slip Op 03367 [3d Dept June 5, 2025]), is a reminder to business divorce litigants – on either side of the v. – not to overlook that crucial third step in the statute of limitations analysis, which can rescue complaints from pre-answer dismissal even if they allege misconduct from decades earlier.Continue Reading A Tardy Plaintiff’s Best Friend: The Open Repudiation Doctrine