Carlaftes v. Bevaper Trucking Services LLC

Background

Peter Carlaftas sued Bevapor Trucking Services LLC, alleging state-law negligence claims arising from a February 7, 2018 collision on the Tappan Zee Bridge. Carlaftas alleged that a tractor-trailer operated by Bevapor struck his vehicle and caused personal injuries.

Bevapor filed a third-party complaint against Latifa Davis-Johnson, Jamal Trusty, Kendrick Maldonado, Cellco Partnership doing business as Verizon Wireless, Kevin Woods, Gary Feigelman, Emily Feigelman, and David McCallister. Bevapor sought indemnification—payment for damages Bevapor might owe Carlaftas—from those third-party defendants.

Statute of Limitations

Bevapor moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which permits dismissal when a complaint does not state a legally sufficient claim. Bevapor argued that Carlaftas filed after the applicable statute of limitations, the deadline for bringing a lawsuit.

Because the case was based on diversity of citizenship and involved state-law claims, the court applied New York’s three-year limitations period for personal-injury claims. Without any additional tolling, the deadline would have been February 7, 2021. A New York executive order paused the limitations period for 228 days, from March 20, 2020, through November 3, 2020. The court therefore calculated the extended deadline as September 23, 2021. Carlaftas filed his complaint on December 2, 2021.

Carlaftas argued that the court should apply equitable tolling, an exceptional extension of a filing deadline when extraordinary circumstances prevented a timely filing. His counsel explained that he mistakenly believed the executive order extended the deadline through December 31, 2021, and cited confusion caused by the pandemic and various court-opening and filing restrictions.

The court held that the pandemic alone did not justify equitable tolling. Carlaftas did not identify specific circumstances or restrictions that prevented him from filing electronically or in person. The court also rejected Carlaftas’s reliance on New York Civil Practice Law and Rules § 205(b), concluding that the statute did not allow him to rely on a cross-claim asserted while he was a defendant in a related state-court action to start this lawsuit after the limitations period had expired.

Disposition

The court concluded that Carlaftas’s complaint was untimely and declined to apply equitable tolling. It granted Bevapor’s motion to dismiss. All of Carlaftas’s claims were dismissed with prejudice. Bevapor’s third-party complaint against the third-party defendants was dismissed without prejudice as moot, as were any remaining cross-claims and counterclaims filed by the third-party defendants. The court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion and close the action.

Judge Nelson S. Roman signed the Opinion & Order on January 18, 2023.