The New York Court of Appeals will hear arguments for this upcoming Term on whether a three-year statute of limiations period pursuant to CPLR 214(6) applies to a breach of contract claim that is essentially one for professional malpractice against an architectual firm. The Court granted leave to appeal in In the Matter of R.M. Kliment to determine the issue. It involves a claim against an architectual firm that it breached its contract because the plaintiff ultimately had to pay additional expenses to comply with applicable building codes after the construction had been completed.

In light of the Court’s decision in Chase Scientific Research, Inc. v. NIA Group, Inc. — which observed that architects fall within the ambit of CPLR 214(6) and held that insurance agents do not — the Court likely address the issue concerning what constitutes a situation where an architect who has promised a specific result and created a contract subject to a six-year limitations period.