DeFilippo v. Knolls of Melville Redev. Co., No. 00-21112, 2010 WL 4904665 (Sup. Ct. Suffolk Co. Nov. 30, 2010)
In DeFilippo v. Knolls of Melville Redevelopment Co., a subcontractor employed the plaintiff, who sustained personal injuries while working. Plaintiff originally brought suit against four defendants but lost at summary judgment. Plaintiff then sought to amend his complaint to add a new defendant, Arlen Contracting Corp. Arlen argued that plaintiff’s claims against it were time barred by the three-year statute of limitations. Plaintiff alleged that the claims should go forward because the lower court properly held that his claims were exempted from the statute of limitations. The court disagreed and found that because Arlen did not have an opportunity to oppose plaintiff’s argument, as it was not a party to the lower court’s decision, Arlen would be given a chance to litigate the issue.