Summary
This New York Appellate Division decision affirms the dismissal of a plaintiff's fraud cause of action regarding a quitclaim deed transfer of real property. The court held that the plaintiff failed to meet her burden of proving she could not have discovered the alleged fraud within the two-year discovery period, as she admitted to signing the conveyance documents without reading them or making any inquiries. Because the fraud claim accrued at the time of execution over six years prior, it was properly dismissed as time-barred.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the fraud claim is time‑barred under CPLR 203 and the two‑year discovery rule.
- Whether the plaintiff’s failure to read the conveyance documents precludes reliance on a fraud claim.
Holdings
- The fraud claim is time‑barred; the dismissal is affirmed.
Key quotations
“A defendant who seeks dismissal of a complaint on the ground that it is barred by the statute of limitations bears the initial burden of proving, prima facie, that the time in which to commence an action has expired.”
“However, a party who signs a document without any valid excuse for not having read it is conclusively bound by its terms.”
Factual background
Nelya Dodobayeva, a native of Uzbekistan with limited English, signed a 2013 quit‑claim deed transferring her one‑half interest in a Queens residential property to Adelina Rubinoff, believing the conveyance would enable her son Steven Dobay to become an owner. She did not read the documents and had no conversation with her son about the conveyance. In January 2020 she discovered that Rubinoff had become the sole owner and filed suit alleging fraud.
Procedural history
The plaintiff filed suit in February 2020 in the Supreme Court, Queens County, seeking to set aside a 2013 conveyance. The defendant moved to dismiss under CPLR 3211(a) for being time‑barred and for failure to state a claim. The trial court granted the dismissal. The plaintiff appealed.