In New York, the statute of limitations for legal malpractice is three years, and it runs from the date the attorney made the alleged mistake, not from the day you discovered it. That rule is set by CPLR § 214(6), and it applies whether you frame the claim as negligence or as a breach of the retainer.1New York State Senate. New York Civil Practice Law and Rules Law 214 – Actions to Be Commenced Within Three Years A handful of doctrines can pause or delay that clock, but none of them soften the basic rule: the deadline can, and often does, expire before the client realizes anything went wrong.
The Three-Year Rule Under CPLR 214(6)
CPLR § 214(6) sets a three-year deadline for all non-medical professional malpractice actions in New York, and legal malpractice sits squarely inside it. The three years apply regardless of the legal theory. If you sue for negligence, you have three years. If you sue for breach of contract on the retainer agreement, you still have three years. New York’s courts and legislature treat both framings the same way for timing purposes, so relabeling a negligence claim as a contract dispute does not buy additional time.1New York State Senate. New York Civil Practice Law and Rules Law 214 – Actions to Be Commenced Within Three Years
Medical, dental, and podiatric malpractice run on a different, shorter statute. For claims against attorneys, § 214(6) is the only limitations period that matters.2NY CourtHelp. Statute of Limitations Chart
When the Clock Starts: The Occurrence Rule
New York uses the “occurrence rule.” The three-year period begins on the date the attorney committed the alleged error, not the date you learned about it and not the date you suffered financial harm from it. The Court of Appeals reaffirmed the rule in Shumsky v. Eisenstein (2001) and Ackerman v. Price Waterhouse (1994).
This puts New York out of step with many states, which use a “discovery rule” that delays accrual until the client knew or should have known about the mistake. New York does not. If an attorney missed a filing on March 15, 2023, the deadline is March 15, 2026, even if the error was buried inside a complex transaction and there was no realistic way to find it until 2025.
The consequence is unforgiving. Valid claims are lost every year because the clock ran silently. This is why the continuous representation doctrine, described next, is often the only thing standing between a former client and a barred claim.
The Continuous Representation Doctrine
If the same attorney kept working on the same matter after the alleged mistake, the three-year clock does not start until that representation ends. This is the continuous representation doctrine, and the Court of Appeals set out its framework in McCoy v. Feinman (2002). The idea behind it is practical: a client should not have to sue the lawyer they are still relying on to handle the case.
The doctrine has firm limits. It applies only to ongoing work on the specific matter where the malpractice allegedly happened. Hiring the same attorney later for something unrelated does not toll the deadline on the original case. And the relationship must be genuinely active. Courts look for an ongoing, developing, and dependent attorney-client relationship, or a mutual understanding that further work on the same subject is still needed.
A stray phone call, a forwarded document, or a holiday card will not carry the argument. A single follow-up email about a different topic will not either. Courts draw a sharp line between an active professional engagement and a dormant connection that happens to involve a lawyer you once retained.
When the representation ends, whether the matter concludes, you fire the attorney, or the attorney withdraws, the three-year clock begins running immediately.
Criminal Defense Malpractice and Favorable Termination
Malpractice claims against a criminal defense attorney follow a different accrual rule. New York requires “favorable termination” of the criminal case before a client can sue. The three-year period does not begin until the case ends in the client’s favor through an acquittal, a dismissal, or a conviction being vacated on appeal or in post-conviction proceedings.
The reasoning is that until a conviction is overturned, any harm the client suffered (imprisonment, lost income, damage to reputation) is legally attributed to the client’s own criminal conduct rather than to the lawyer’s negligence. A malpractice suit filed while the conviction still stands will be dismissed as premature.
The flip side is that someone whose conviction is never overturned cannot bring a malpractice claim at all, regardless of how poorly the attorney performed. Post-conviction proceedings often take years, and the three-year malpractice clock only begins once they end favorably.
Tolling for Minors and Incapacitated Clients
CPLR § 208 extends the deadline when the person harmed by malpractice was a minor (under 18) or legally incapacitated when the claim arose. The limitations period runs three years after the disability ends (the minor turns 18, or the incapacitated person regains capacity), or three years after the disabled person dies, whichever comes first.3New York State Senate. New York Civil Practice Law and Rules Law 208 – Infancy, Insanity
For incapacitated adults, there is an outer boundary: the tolling cannot push the deadline more than ten years past the date the malpractice occurred. That ten-year cap does not apply to minors in non-medical malpractice cases, including legal malpractice. So a two-year-old harmed by attorney malpractice has until age 21 to file, even though far more than ten years will have passed.3New York State Senate. New York Civil Practice Law and Rules Law 208 – Infancy, Insanity
Active-Duty Military Service
The federal Servicemembers Civil Relief Act pauses statutes of limitations for people on active duty. Under 50 U.S.C. § 3936, time spent in active service is simply excluded from the three-year window. There is no requirement to show that service prevented filing or that the servicemember was deployed overseas. The Supreme Court called this statutory command “unambiguous, unequivocal, and unlimited” in Conroy v. Aniskoff (1993). The tolling reaches active-duty training and periods of leave or medical absence as well.4GovInfo. 50 USC 3936 – Statute of Limitations
If Your Attorney Files for Bankruptcy
When an attorney files for bankruptcy and the automatic stay blocks litigation, 11 U.S.C. § 108(c) preserves any unexpired limitations period until at least 30 days after the stay is lifted or terminated. That gives you a minimum window to file once the bankruptcy no longer stands in the way.5Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 11 USC 108 – Extension of Time
The statute does not revive dead claims. If the three years had already run out before the bankruptcy petition was filed, § 108(c) does nothing for you. It only protects deadlines still alive when the petition hits.5Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 11 USC 108 – Extension of Time
When a Claim Might Fit Breach of Fiduciary Duty Instead
Not every wrong an attorney commits is negligence. If the conduct involves intentional wrongdoing (self-dealing, concealing a conflict of interest, participating in a fraud) the claim may be framed as a breach of fiduciary duty. Under New York law, a breach of fiduciary duty claim grounded in actual fraud carries a six-year statute of limitations, double the malpractice period.
Courts watch for attempts to relabel a negligence claim as a fiduciary duty claim just to catch the longer deadline. The dividing line is intent. A careless mistake is malpractice with a three-year deadline no matter what the complaint calls it. Deliberate, dishonest conduct is different. The inquiry is fact-intensive, and courts regularly dismiss fiduciary duty claims they read as repackaged malpractice.
What Happens If You Miss the Deadline
A claim filed after the three-year period, taking any applicable tolling into account, will be dismissed. The attorney’s counsel raises the statute of limitations as an affirmative defense, and once the court finds the deadline expired, the claim is permanently barred. The strength of the underlying malpractice, the size of the loss, and the sympathy of the circumstances do not matter. Courts have no equitable authority to override an expired limitations period.
Because the occurrence rule starts the clock before many clients know they have been harmed, the safe move is to consult a malpractice attorney as soon as you suspect something is wrong. Time spent investigating and gathering evidence still counts against the three years; there is no pause for figuring things out. And if continuous representation is the only thing keeping the clock from running, remember that the moment the representation on that matter ends, the three years start.