How Long Do You Have to File a Personal Injury Lawsuit in New York?

The Major New York Personal Injury Statutes of Limitations, Compared

Every New York personal injury claim runs against a specific statute of limitations. The deadline depends on what kind of case it is, who the defendant is, and when the injury was — or should have been — discovered. The table below summarizes the deadlines that matter most. The sections that follow explain the rules in detail.

The Discovery Rule — When the Clock Starts Later Than the Date of Injury

New York does not have a general discovery rule. The default rule is that the SOL begins to run on the date of the injury — not when the plaintiff learned about it. But the legislature has carved out a handful of important exceptions where the clock starts when the injury is, or reasonably should have been, discovered.

Cancer misdiagnosis (Lavern’s Law, CPLR §214-a as amended 2018)

Lavern’s Law, enacted as L. 2018, ch. 5, added a discovery rule to CPLR §214-a specifically for cancer cases. A plaintiff alleging negligent failure to diagnose a malignant tumor or malignant blood disease has 2 years and 6 months from the date the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known of the alleged negligent act, subject to an outer cutoff of 7 years from the original act, omission, or failure to diagnose. The statute is named for Lavern Wilkinson, a Brooklyn mother whose lung cancer was missed at a public hospital for over two years.

Before Lavern’s Law, the 2.5-year medical malpractice clock ran from the date of the misdiagnosis itself — so a patient who learned three years later that their cancer had been visible on an earlier scan had no remedy. Lavern’s Law fixed that, but only for malignancies. Non-cancer misdiagnoses still run from the date of the negligent act, subject to continuous treatment.

Toxic exposure (CPLR §214-c)

CPLR §214-c gives plaintiffs harmed by exposure to toxic or harmful substances 3 years from the date of discovery of the injury (or from the date the injury reasonably should have been discovered, whichever is earlier). The statute applies broadly to asbestos, environmental contamination, defective drugs, and similar latent-injury cases. A separate 1-year revival window under §214-c(4) allows new claims after the discovery of a new scientific link between the exposure and the injury.

Foreign objects left in the body (CPLR §214-a)

If a surgeon leaves a sponge, clamp, or other foreign object inside the patient, CPLR §214-a gives the patient 1 year from the date the object was, or reasonably should have been, discovered — regardless of when the surgery was. The rule does not apply to fixation devices (orthopedic screws, pacemakers, implants) that were intentionally left in place. Courts have applied the foreign-object rule strictly, and it remains one of the few generous extensions in New York medical malpractice law.

Sexual abuse — Child Victims Act and Adult Survivors Act

The Child Victims Act (CPLR §214-g) created a two-year revival window for previously time-barred childhood sexual abuse claims; that window closed on August 14, 2021. The Adult Survivors Act (CPLR §214-j) created a parallel one-year revival window for sexual-offense claims against adult victims; it closed on November 23, 2023. Ongoing claims by survivors who turned 18 after 2019 remain governed by the extended CPLR §208(b) framework, which allows survivors of childhood sexual abuse to sue until age 55. Other sexual-offense claims run on standard intentional-tort and personal-injury timelines unless an additional revival window is enacted.

Tolling — When the SOL Clock Pauses

Tolling is the legal term for pausing the statute-of-limitations clock. The CPLR recognizes a handful of grounds for tolling. None of them is automatic, and each one has been narrowed by case law over the years. Plan around the underlying SOL; treat tolling as a last-line defense, not a strategy.

Infancy — CPLR §208(a)

When a personal injury claim accrues to a minor, the statute of limitations is tolled during infancy and begins to run on the minor’s 18th birthday. For general negligence claims, that means a 3-year SOL effectively runs to the minor’s 21st birthday. For medical malpractice, the toll is capped: the SOL cannot be extended more than 10 years from the date of the negligent act, even if the child is still a minor when the 10-year cap expires. The cap was a 1986 compromise between victim protection and provider insurability and it has survived every challenge since.

Insanity — CPLR §208(a)

A plaintiff who is "insane" within the meaning of CPLR §208(a) — defined narrowly as an "over-all inability to function in society" — is entitled to toll the SOL until the disability is removed. This is a high bar. Depression, anxiety, PTSD, and even temporary psychiatric hospitalization usually are not enough. The disability must be continuous and total.

Continuous treatment (medical malpractice only)

The continuous-treatment doctrine pauses the 2.5-year malpractice clock for as long as the patient continues to be treated by the same provider for the same condition or course of treatment that gave rise to the alleged malpractice. The SOL starts on the last day of treatment. Routine follow-ups, treatment for unrelated conditions, and gaps in treatment all complicate the analysis. Continuous-treatment fights are among the most heavily litigated SOL issues in New York medical malpractice.

Defendant absent from New York — CPLR §207

If the defendant is outside New York for four months or more after the claim accrues, CPLR §207 can toll the SOL for the period of absence. The rule is rarely useful in modern practice because long-arm jurisdiction usually permits service on out-of-state defendants without waiting.

Federal bankruptcy and other automatic stays

If a defendant files for bankruptcy under Title 11, an automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. §362 halts all civil litigation against the debtor. The SOL is effectively tolled during the stay, but plaintiffs must still file a proof of claim within the bankruptcy timeline. Coordinating a personal-injury action with a bankruptcy estate is a specialized exercise and a common trap for the unwary.

The 90-Day Municipal Notice Trap (GML §50-e)

General Municipal Law §50-e is the most aggressive procedural trap in New York personal injury law. The 90-day Notice of Claim is jurisdictional. It is the threshold question that the municipal defendant’s lawyers will check before reading anything else in the file. The requirements are specific:

• Form: a sworn (notarized) statement under oath.
• Content: name and address of the claimant, name and address of counsel, the nature of the claim, the time/place/manner of the incident, the items of damage or injury, and the basis for the claim.
• Specificity: the description must be detailed enough that the municipality can investigate. Vague allegations have been thrown out repeatedly.
• Filing: served personally on the City Comptroller (NYC), County Attorney or Comptroller (Nassau, Suffolk, etc.), the Town Clerk, the Village Clerk, or the relevant public-authority counsel — depending on which entity is at fault.
• Deadline: 90 days from the date of the incident (or from the date of death for wrongful death).

After a timely Notice of Claim, the municipality has the right to conduct a §50-h hearing — a sworn pre-suit examination of the claimant — before suit may be filed. The 1-year-and-90-day SOL under GML §50-i then governs the lawsuit itself.

Late-notice applications under §50-e(5)

If you miss the 90-day window, GML §50-e(5) allows a court to grant leave to serve late notice — but only within the underlying 1-year-and-90-day SOL and only after weighing several discretionary factors: whether the municipality acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts within 90 days or a reasonable time after; whether the delay would substantially prejudice the municipality’s ability to defend; and whether there is a reasonable excuse for the delay (infancy, physical incapacity, late identification of the wrongdoer, etc.). Courts are not generous. Most late-notice motions lose.

Common Notice of Claim pitfalls

• Wrong entity: serving the City when the negligent actor was a school district, or the County when the actor was an independent public authority.
• Insufficient specificity: describing the incident as "trip and fall on a sidewalk" without identifying the location or condition.
• Missing the deadline by even a day: §50-e is calculated to the date, not the business day.
• Failing to identify the public actor: if the negligent driver of a county vehicle is unknown, the Notice should describe the vehicle and circumstances.
• Improper service: faxing the Notice instead of personally serving it on the Comptroller is a frequent fatal error.

How to File a Medical Malpractice Lawsuit in New York — and Why You Need a Lawyer

People search "how to file a medical malpractice lawsuit without a lawyer" because legal fees are scary and the procedure looks like it might be doable solo. It is not. New York imposes specific pre-suit requirements that make pro-se medical malpractice litigation a near-impossible task, and the 2.5-year SOL leaves no room to recover from procedural mistakes.

The CPLR §3012-a certificate of merit

Under CPLR §3012-a, every medical malpractice complaint in New York must be accompanied by a certificate of merit signed by plaintiff’s counsel. The certificate must attest that counsel: (a) consulted with at least one physician licensed to practice in this state or another state and reasonably believed to be knowledgeable in the relevant issues; (b) concluded on the basis of that review and consultation that there is a reasonable basis for the commencement of the action; or (c) attempted three separate consultations and was unable to obtain one in time. The alternative path (c) is narrow and rarely available. The practical effect is that the complaint cannot be filed unless an expert physician has reviewed the records and concluded that malpractice occurred.

The pre-suit investigation

A typical medical malpractice pre-suit investigation includes: obtaining complete medical records (HIPAA-compliant authorizations to every provider), retaining a board-certified physician in the relevant specialty for expert review ($2,500–$10,000 per review), reviewing the continuous-treatment timeline against CPLR §214-a, identifying every potentially liable provider (treating physicians, hospitals, residents, anesthesiologists, radiologists, nurses), and confirming insurance coverage and corporate structure. The investigation routinely takes 90 days or more — which is why initial consultation should happen well before the 2.5-year SOL approaches.

Why pro-se medical malpractice almost always fails

Hospital and physician malpractice insurers (MLMIC, The Doctors Company, ProAssure, Health Capital Group, etc.) will not engage in settlement discussions without an expert affidavit. Defense lawyers move to dismiss for failure to comply with §3012-a, fail to plead specific acts of malpractice, or sue the wrong party. Even when a pro-se complaint survives the initial motion, depositions, expert disclosure under CPLR §3101(d), and trial in a New York medical malpractice case require thousands of hours of skilled work. The few self-represented plaintiffs who reach trial almost always lose because they cannot lay foundation for medical evidence under the rules. Hire counsel — almost every reputable New York medical malpractice firm offers a free initial consultation.

What If You Already Missed the Deadline?

If the SOL has run, the most likely outcome is that the case is over. There are a handful of rare exceptions that occasionally rescue an otherwise time-barred claim, but they are narrow and fact-specific. Do not rely on any of them as a planning strategy.

Equitable estoppel

If the defendant’s own affirmative misconduct caused the plaintiff to miss the deadline — for example, by misrepresenting the cause of an injury, hiding the existence of a foreign object, or concealing the identity of the wrongdoer — courts may estop the defendant from asserting the SOL. The plaintiff must show specific affirmative conduct beyond simple silence; a "duty to disclose" is not enough on its own outside of fiduciary contexts.

Federal claims and preemption

Some federal causes of action have their own SOLs that may exceed the New York state-law deadline. The Federal Tort Claims Act gives a 2-year window for claims against federal employees and VA hospitals. Section 1983 civil rights claims borrow the state PI SOL (3 years in New York). EMTALA (federal emergency-room law) has a 2-year SOL. Counsel may identify a federal hook that survives even when the state-law claim is dead.

Other longer SOLs that might still apply

• Breach of contract — generally 6 years under CPLR §213(2). A medical malpractice claim sometimes has a parallel breach-of-warranty theory.
• Fraud — 6 years from the act or 2 years from discovery, whichever is later, under CPLR §213(8).
• Intentional torts (assault, battery, false imprisonment) — 1 year under CPLR §215(3), shorter than negligence but separate.
• Successor-liability theories — when the actor is a corporate entity that merged or dissolved, alternative defendants may be reachable on longer timelines.

An experienced personal injury attorney will run every potential cause of action and SOL combination before declaring a case time-barred. There is rarely time to wait.