Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Patchogue associates, LLCSears, Roebuck & Co. v. Patchogue associates, LLC
The plaintiff did not commence the instant action until 2008, well over six years after the causes of action accrued. In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant‘s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as time-barred.
The plaintiff‘s remaining contentions have been rendered academic in light of our determination. Skelos, J.P., Leventhal, Austin and Sgroi, JJ., concur.