Westchester County Correction Officers Benevolent Ass'n v. County of Westchester

65 A.D.3d 1226 (2d Dep't 2009) · Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department · September 22, 2009

Summary

The court held that the plaintiffs were not required to exhaust the collective bargaining agreement's grievance procedure because retirement benefits were expressly excluded from the agreement's definition of a grievance. It also held that the defendants were collaterally estopped from relitigating the association's standing, the sufficiency of the complaint, and the complete statute-of-limitations defense. However, claims by individual plaintiffs for breaches accruing more than six years before the action commenced were time-barred under CPLR 213(2).

Holdings

  1. The plaintiffs were not required to exhaust the grievance procedure because the agreement expressly excluded matters involving retirement benefits from the definition of a grievance.
  2. Defendants were collaterally estopped from relitigating whether the WCCOBA lacked standing and whether the complaint failed to state a cause of action.
  3. Defendants were collaterally estopped from relitigating whether the individual plaintiffs' claims were entirely barred by the six-year limitations period.
  4. Claims by the individual plaintiffs accruing more than six years before commencement of the action were time-barred and had to be dismissed.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the plaintiffs were required to exhaust the collective bargaining agreement's grievance procedure before pursuing claims concerning retirement benefits.
  2. Whether defendants were collaterally estopped from relitigating the WCCOBA's standing and whether the complaint stated a cause of action.
  3. Whether defendants were collaterally estopped from asserting that the claims by the individual plaintiffs were entirely barred by the six-year statute of limitations.
  4. Whether claims by the individual plaintiffs accruing more than six years before commencement of the action were time-barred.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (10)

  • Franklin Dev. Co., Inc. v. Atlantic Mut. Ins. Co., 60 A.D.3d 897 (2009)(followed)
  • Luscher v. Arrua, 21 A.D.3d 1005 (2005)(followed)
  • D'Arata v. New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 76 N.Y.2d 659, 664 (1990)(followed)
  • Kaufman v. Eli Lilly & Co., 65 N.Y.2d 449, 455 (1985)(followed)
  • CSEA Empl. Benefit Fund v. Warwick Val. Cent. Sch. Dist., 36 A.D.3d 582, 584 (2007)(followed)
  • Matter of Prote Contr. Co. v. Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 198 A.D.2d 418, 420 (1993)(followed)
  • Matter of DeCintio v. Cohalan, 18 A.D.3d 872, 873 (2005)(followed)
  • Matter of Condo Units v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 4 A.D.3d 424, 425 (2004)(followed)
  • State of New York v. CSRI Ltd. P'ship, 289 A.D.2d 394, 395 (2001)(followed)
  • Scheg v. Agway, Inc., 229 A.D.2d 963 (1996)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…