Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department reversed a lower court order denying defendants' motion to dismiss an employment discrimination and wrongful termination complaint as time-barred. The court held that the plaintiff's electronically signed employment application contained a valid written agreement shortening the statute of limitations for employment-related claims to six months. Because the plaintiff filed her lawsuit one day after this contractual deadline expired and failed to raise a factual question regarding unconscionability or unenforceability, the trial court should have granted the motion to dismiss.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a written contractual provision shortening the statute of limitations to six months is enforceable to bar the plaintiff’s claim.
- Whether the plaintiff raised a genuine issue of fact to defeat the motion to dismiss as time‑barred.
Holdings
- The six‑month contractual limitations period is enforceable; the plaintiff’s claim is time‑barred and the motion to dismiss is granted.
- The plaintiff did not raise any factual issue; therefore the motion to dismiss is granted.
Key quotations
“'[A]n agreement which modifies the Statute of Limitations by specifying a shorter, but reasonable, period within which to commence an action is enforceable provided it is in writing'”
Factual background
In 2021 the plaintiff applied for a position with Northwell Health and signed an employment application containing a provision limiting any employment‑related claim to six months. She was hired in March 2021 and terminated on November 23, 2021. She filed suit on May 24, 2022, one day after the six‑month period expired.
Procedural history
Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint under CPLR 3211(a)(5) asserting a six‑month contractual limitations period. The Supreme Court, Suffolk County denied the motion. Defendants appealed.