## Facts

- Chase Scientific Research, Inc. hired NIA Group, Inc., an insurance broker, to procure property insurance, and NIA obtained a policy effective May 31, 1995.
- A January 19, 1996 storm damaged Chase’s warehouse and specialized inventory; the carriers disputed the amount owed, and Chase settled with the carriers for $275,000.
- On January 7, 1999, Chase sued NIA for negligence and breach of contract, alleging failure to procure adequate coverage for its inventory.
- In a companion action, Giuseppe Gugliotta obtained insurance through Apollo Roland Brokerage, Inc.; after a slip-and-fall judgment, he learned the policy allegedly lacked the requested general liability coverage.
- Gugliotta sued on March 6, 1998 for negligence and breach of contract based on failure to obtain the agreed liability coverage.
- Trial courts dismissed both complaints as untimely under CPLR 214(6)’s three-year limitations period for nonmedical malpractice, and the Appellate Division affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether insurance agents and brokers qualify as “professionals” for purposes of CPLR 214(6), making the three-year nonmedical malpractice limitations period applicable to negligence and contract-based claims arising from insurance procurement.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals held that insurance agents and brokers are not “professionals” within the meaning of CPLR 214(6).
- CPLR 214(6)’s three-year nonmedical malpractice limitations period therefore did not apply to the plaintiffs’ claims.
- The Court reversed the Appellate Division orders and reinstated the complaints for further proceedings under the correct statute(s) of limitations.

## Legal Principles

- CPLR 214(6) imposes a three-year limitations period for nonmedical malpractice regardless of whether the theory is labeled tort or contract.
- “Malpractice” in CPLR 214(6) refers to professional misconduct toward a client, which requires identifying whether the defendant is a “professional” for purposes of the statute.
- The relevant “professional” category is limited to traditional professions characterized by extensive formal education and training, licensing, professional standards, and client-directed advisory or judgment-based services.
- Licensing or specialized knowledge alone is insufficient to bring an occupation within CPLR 214(6).
- Claims against insurance brokers and agents for failure to procure requested coverage are not governed by CPLR 214(6) and may instead fall under other applicable limitations periods, including contract limitations rules.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeals ruled that CPLR 214(6)’s three-year limitations period for nonmedical malpractice does not apply to suits against insurance brokers and agents because they are not “professionals” within the statute, requiring reinstatement of the dismissed complaints and application of the appropriate non-214(6) limitations period.


Chase Sci. Rsch., Inc. v. NIA Grp., Inc., 96 N.Y.2d 20, 725 N.Y.S.2d 592, 749 N.E.2d 161 (2001)