On September 6, 2022, Justice Knipel of the Kings County Commercial Division issued a decision in Trump Vil. Section 4, Inc. v. Lawless & Mangione Architects Engrs. LLP, 2022 NY Slip Op. 33159(U), holding that a breach of contract action was duplicative to a time-barred malpractice action, explaining:
The plaintiffs breach of contract claim (cause of action four) against defendants are based on the same underlying facts as its malpractice claims. Plaintiff’s malpractice and breach of contract claims against defendants L&M and Mangione are both based on defendants’ alleged negligence in exercising their professional duty of care, including their obligation of loyalty to plaintiff. Plaintiff alleges that L&M and Mangione demonstrated loyalty to co-defendants ECS, QNCC, EC Services, and Kashinsky through a scheme to contract electrical work and authorize inflated requisition payments to ECS, an unlicensed shell company, which would divert payments to Kashinsky’s other companies (EC Services and QNCC).
The New York Court of Appeals has clarified that the three-year limitations period pursuant to CPLR § 214(6) applies to all actions that are technically malpractice actions, regardless of the theory of liability or proposed remedy. Thus, the pertinent inquiry is whether the claim is essentially a malpractice claim.
Plaintiffs breach of contract claim is duplicative of its malpractice claims, as compliance with defendants’ contractual duties is consistent with the defendant’s ordinary professional obligations. Additionally, plaintiffs breach of contract and malpractice claims arise out of the same facts.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).