In today’s article, we examine Hofman v. Braun, 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 34102(U) (Sup. Ct., N.Y. County Oct. 24, 2025), a case addressing the statute of limitations for a breach of fiduciary duty claim and the continuous wrong doctrine.

In Celauro v. Celauro, 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 04870 (Sept. 10, 2025), a minority shareholder of a family-owned business alleged that company executives operated an illicit cash business, diverted profits and deprived shareholders of distributions/dividends. The motion court dismissed most of the breach of fiduciary duty claim, finding many of the allegations to be time-barred under the six-year statute of limitations and the surviving claims too speculative.

In New York, as in most jurisdictions, statutes of limitation serve as a cutoff point for initiating legal action. In business litigation, parties often encounter statutes of limitation issues involving, inter alia, breach of fiduciary duty and fraud claims.

In New York, the statute of limitations for breach of fiduciary duty claims varies by remedy: three years for monetary relief, six years for equitable or fraud-based claims. A claim accrues when the fiduciary openly repudiates their duty or when damages occur. In Lambos v. Karabinis, a case that we examine today, the court found no clear repudiation of fiduciary duties, so the statute of limitations had not begun to run.

What does the Labor Department fiduciary standard mean for financial advisors? After telegraphing its punch for almost 6 years, the Department of Labor recently announced the highly anticipated fiduciary standard regulation that will require financial advisors who provide investment recommendations for retirement accounts, such as 401(k)s and IRAs, to meet a fiduciary standard. These advisors are now required to put their clients' interests before their own, rather than adhe