Efforts to Remedy Alleged Errors Can Trigger Continuous Representation Doctrine

On April 20, 2016, the Second Department issued a decision in Bronstein v. Omega Construction Group, Inc., 2016 NY Slip Op. 02951, holding that a defendant's efforts to remedy alleged errors triggered the continuous representation doctrine, explaining:

Contrary to [the defendant's] contentions, in response to his prima facie showing that the action was commenced against him more than three years after his withdrawal, the plaintiffs succeeded in raising a question of fact as to whether the continuous representation doctrine is applicable so as to toll the running of the three-year statute of limitations. Under the circumstances, the evidence of continuing communications between the parties, and of efforts by [the defendant] to remedy the alleged errors or deficiencies in the filed plans, supported the denial of [his] motion to dismiss the amended complaint insofar as asserted against him.

(Internal citations omitted).