New York Court Finds an Action is Timely in Some Circumstances in CPLR 205(a) Decision
The Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court's First Department recently issued a decision addressing the calculation of the six-month timeframe permitted to file a new action, according to New York's Civil Practice Law & Rules (CPLR) 205(a) and following the termination of a prior action. The First Department concluded that an action is timely if it is brought within six months of the termination of time to appeal a denial of a motion to renew.
In Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Gouin, a first foreclosure action was commenced in 2012 and dismissed under CPLR 3215(c) [failure to seek a default judgment] August 6, 2018. The plaintiff filed a notice of appeal but did not perfect its appeal. 
CPLR 205(a), with limited exceptions, allows for the commencement of a new action after the termination of a prior timely action, provided that the commencement and service of the new action take place within six months of the termination of the prior action. The First Department held that, according to CPLR 205(a), the second action was timely because the "order denying plaintiff's motion to renew was appealable as of right" and the prior "action did not terminate until plaintiff's time to appeal that order had expired and its appeals as of right were exhausted." The fact that the plaintiff did not appeal from the denial of the motion to renew and reargue was not a factor in determining that the second action was timely because that denial was appealable as of right.
Lenders should review their portfolios to determine whether any previously dismissed action could be the subject of a timely viable motion to renew. If so, they should promptly proceed with a motion.
Topics
Related Capabilities
Featured Insights

Employment Law Observer
Aug 10, 2026
As Leaves Fall, Leave Requests Rise: Are You Compliant With Chicago’s Expanded Rules?

Press Release
Aug 7, 2026
Daniel McGrath Re-Elected Senior Director of the Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel

Insights for Insurers Alert
Aug 7, 2026
California Supreme Court Clarifies Pleading Standards for Excess Policy Claims

Press Release
Aug 6, 2026
Charles Townsend Named a Best Mentor Finalist in the 2026 ALM Texas Legal Awards

Webinar
Aug 5, 2026
April Toy Moderates HNBA Webinar on AI in the Practice of Law

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Aug 5, 2026
2026 AI Compliance: Upcoming Laws Every Organization Needs to Know

Press Release
July 21, 2026 | Updated on August 4, 2026
Three Hinshaw Attorneys Named to the 2026 National Black Lawyers’ Top 40 Under 40 List

Healthcare Alert
Aug 3, 2026
Fixing the Emergency Refill Trap: What California’s AB 1587 Means for Pharmacies

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Jul 30, 2026
Should Text Messages be Considered “Calls” Under the TCPA? The Seventh Circuit Says No

Healthcare Alert
Jul 30, 2026
California Courts Sharply Curtail the MICRA Damages Cap in Nursing Home Litigation

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 30, 2026
Analyzing a Couple of Cases Involving Exclusions in D&O Policies

