Skip to main content

What is the statute of limitations for elder abuse charges in the state of New York?

Lake Mary, FL |
Filed under: Elder abuse

Daughter severely assaulted her mother that the mother had to be hospitalized for months.

Attorney Answers 2

Posted

For a civil claim for personal injury, 3 years in NY. Retain a lawyer in NY from Avvo to investigate. Good luck.

Licensed in PA & NJ. 29% Contingency Fee. Phone: 215-510-6755 www.InjuryLawyerPhiladelphia.com

Mark as helpful

4 lawyers agree

1 comment

David Bradley Dohner

David Bradley Dohner

Posted

Sorry for busting on your head shot, man. When my insomnia gets bad, I get ornery. Next referrral in Philly goes to you. Take care. Best, Dave Dohner

Posted

Unfortunately, I must advise that although it appears that you directed your question to AVVO, with, assumedly, a request that same be presented to the most relevant group of attorneys, as defined or segregated in all likelihood by a simple algorithm developed or owned by AVVO, who would seemingly be best suited to answer the particular question posed (although frankly, I am simply attempting to apply logic to the situation and take my best guess at the actual process utilized by AVVO's team, as an integrated unit; I can not state with any level of certainty whatsoever that AVVO uses any one particular methodology for receipt; analysis; grouping or assignment of questions presented; and/or the dissemination of same to a presumably defined subset or subgroup of all Attorneys who donate their collective time, energy, and attention to questions posed by individuals through and "on" AVVO), it may, unfortunately, not be the case that the most desired outcome resulted in this instance.

Your question appears, again, to have been initiated in Lake Mary, Florida, which more likely than not means that same was directed to AVVO by you via the internet, with the hope and expectation that the above process would take place, and, accordingly, you likely reasonably believed that a number of lawyers with knowledge of New York law, and, one would, or at least I would, hope and expect moreover, that this same group of attorneys would be comprised of attorneys who are and perhaps for some time now have been licensed to practice in New York State. While attorneys from other states MAY possess accurate knowledge of the laws and intricacies of the POTENTIAL INTERACTION AND RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ONE FOREIGN STATE'S STATUTE GOVERNING ONE TYPE OF ACTIVITY OR OTHER SUBJECT OF LEGISLATION AS WELL AS A STATUTE, PRESUMABLY EXISTANT IN ALL STATES, WHICH SPECIFIES THE PERIOD OF LIMITATIONS FOR ACTIONS OF EACH SORT FOR WHICH THERE IS SUCH A PERIOD DEFINED BY STATUTE, this is not necessarily true.

As a matter of practice, without deviation, for reasons which to me seem obvious - reasons with which a great many of my colleagues agree wholeheartedly - I will not "take a shot" at a question concerning the laws and regulations of a State in which I am not licensed to practice law. I am stretching this point to a bit of an extreme to emphasize a point, and will add that even if I did attempt to do so for an individual out of dire necessity or emergency of some such bizarre sort that I can not even create an example of same in my imagination, I would never "take a shot"....knowingly. And that is the problem that I think many of those attorneys, well meaning or otherwise, who attempt to answer questions concerning the laws and/or the application of the laws, of any State other than the one or more States within which he or she has been actually licensed to practice. While he or she may not believe that it is exactly that...."taking a shot" ....that he or she is doing while providing information under such circumstances, well-intendedly or not (and, therefore, obviously, doing a disservice to the client, and, frankly doing the very same thing to him or herself....knowingly or not), that is exactly what he or she is doing. It is a horrible idea; it is inevitably going to lead to a difficult situation at some point in the not at all distant future, if it has not done so already, and any and disclaimers to the contrary, it is incontroverible that if the result is a negative outcome of some level of magnitude that we will later name after that oft-warned individual, paper as well will likely start to fly.

I find that there are many more questions posed by individuals on this site which concern matters which are or would be properly venued within and governed by the laws of the State of Florida by which I was licensed to practice law nearly nineteen (19) years ago, and that same have been set forth by individuals who truly need help.
(See "Comment" below;cont)

We are pleased to offer a free thirty (30) minute initial telephone consultation, or, if possible, will attempt to schedule a free thirty (30) minute initial office consultation. Neither this offer of a free initial consultation, nor the mere fact that the initial consultation may have ultimately been conducted, whether telephonically or at our office location, should be construed; assumed; interpreted; or understood by any individual who was granted a free initial consultation for which no consideration of any sort whatsoever was tendered, to have formed or created an attorney-client relationship, or to have created any obligations owed by the attorney or attorney's firm to any individual who was given a free initial consultation, by the mere undertaking of the free initial consultation for which no consideration of any sort was tendered to attorney or attorney's firm. The formation of an attorney-client relationship occurs through the process of negotiation between the prospective parties, the individual seeking legal representation, and the attorney, acting individually, or as an agent of a firm (the capacity in which the attorney is acting shall be disclosed to prospective client, if negotiations for legal representation in exchange for good and valuable consideration are undertaken by the prospective client and the attorney. If agreement is reached by and between the parties for legal representation after the mutually satisfactory negotiation of the agreement for legal representation, and all of its individual terms; the scope of representation to be provided by the attorney to the prospective client has been delineated to the mutual satisfaction of the parties; the manner of payment of good and valuable consideration by the prospective client to the attorney has been determined; and it has been conceded by the parties that all of those factors upon which agreement had been reached by the parties and which were recited herein, had been agreed upon by the parties only after careful consideration and sufficient review of the document styled Agreement for Legal Representation, and after it has likewise been conceded by the parties that each respectively had been presented with the opportunity to have the document reviewed independently by each respective party's personal attorney, or any other attorney of his or her chooosing. If the Agreement for Legal Representation contains terms regarding contingency fee agreement or agreements for payment to the attorney for all or a portion of his or her services and legal representation on behalf of the Client, Client concedes that he or she has been presented with an additional document entitled "Statement of Client's Rights", which is a document created by the Florida Bar and approved for use in matters in which payment in full or part, is tendered by contingency fee agreement. Please note that any commentary or response offered through this site is based on the limited set of facts and background data supplied by the individual framing the question and would in all likelihood require more investigation before a complete response could properly be framed to thoroughly answer the question posed. No attorney-client relationship is, or should be presumed to be, formed through the comments or responses provided to the individual posing the question, as a courtesy, here, through this forum, nor should any other duties or obligations be construed; assumed; or otherwise be inferred to exist and/or owed to the individual who posed the question by the attorney who provided the best guidance possible to said individual under the circumstances presented as they were, including the unreasonable assumption that a full and thorough legal analysis of an individual's situation could be formulated simply based on the minute portion of the entirety of the facts and circumstances surrounding any legal matter, which could in no manner possibly be presented here in such a form which would allow for a thorough analysis, evaluation, or legal opinion to be formed by the Attorney.

Mark as helpful

2 lawyers agree

5 comments

David Bradley Dohner

David Bradley Dohner

Posted

These individuals would be better served, in my view, by thoughtfully crafted; thoroughly explored; and creatively analyzed answers, which although not legal advice, as it has been and is on an on-going basis made repeatedly clear, that same is not now, nor I would think and hope, ever would be, provided in a setting lacking personal interaction and which does not provide the attorney and his or her client the ability to converse simultaneously regarding any and all issues at hand because that sort of give and take, with on the spot modifications or tailoring of questions or answers, and the "within the moment" evolution of an "answer" to a question, or the development of a strategy, neither of which is now, nor ever should be a static process or "thing", but one would hope will always be a dynamic and relational "ideal", if you will, that only the attorney and client working together in real time, with all facts somehow at one another's disposal - I don't care if they are laid on my office floor (as many have been from time to time) - only this manner of approach will, in my view, result in the "best" WHATEVER it is to which one might make reference. For all of these reasons, and with no respect intended to my out of state colleagues; with every concession that a great many of them are so much more gifted than me, that comparison is not even merited (okay, I actually laughed out loud at that one...they really aren't, says my ego, which also noted for my own benefit that false modesty is not a color that I wear well), but some are almost every bit as good and they are licensed in the foreign state (relative Florida, obviously) and, therefore, assumedly, practice within that State (if they don't maybe that is why they are answering questions from other States in which they are not licensed on AVVO. Last point: I am not saying that, for example, one given individual attorney may on a particular occasion provide a much better answer to a given question concerning a matter germane to a state other than the one within which he or she is licensed to practice, than a particular lawyer who happens to be licensed, for example, in Florida, but practices Family Law and has no expertise in medical malpratice cases, yet, again for reasons which defy explanation and logic, continues time and again to attempt to answer same, sometimes stating that he or she is not sure of the answer as is is not an area familiar to him or here, but sometimes not stating same. The inherent flaw with the latter is self-obvious; as to the problem with the former, I believe that it is as well, but it is worth rhetorically asking "if you don't know the body of law, why, in the very same manner "take a shot" at answering it. Folks, give well-considered answers to the questions with respect to which you have subtantial, better yet, extensive and current knowledge of the body of law having bearing on same; provide answers which are a bit more perspicacious than..."you may a case; consult with an attorney immediately or visit my website". You sound like knuckleheads; answers of that nature lack professionalism; they, furthermore, shine a spotlight directly on those areas about which you are completely ignorant and the viewer discomfort is terrible; and, finally, if you insist on answering question concerning the laws of the State of Florida and/or same as applied to actions arising in such manner that same are properly venued in the State of Florida and/or matters with respect to which a conflict and/or choice of laws question existed but has been resolved in such manner that Florida law will be the controlling law; or, if, as is the case here, you insist on answering what at first blush appeared to be a Florida law question, but after as simple perusal of the question it has become apparent that is a question concerning New York law; and YOU happen to be...I AM PICKING ANY JURISDICTION AT RANDOM...a PENNSYLVANIA lawyer with your main office apparently being situated in Philadelphia, while your hair stylist has his practice at Fort Benning, assum

David Bradley Dohner

David Bradley Dohner

Posted

Okay, that's enough of this nonsense. I gave him nearly three minutes to straighten the situation out and he chose to do nothing about it, so it's not on me........... Lassen....this one's for that "SOMEONE WENT TO LAW SCHOOL AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS LOUSY HEAD SHOT FROM A GUY WHO SOLD BAR REVIEW CLASSES DURING THE DAY AND CLAIMED TO BE A PHOTOGRAPHER AT NIGHT AND CHARGED ME $500 BUCKS FOR THIS HEAD SHOT ONLY A MALE MODEL FOR REALLY CHEAP DESIGNER IMITATION POLY-BLEND COMMERCIAL CATALOG SUITS WOULD CLIP TO HIS RESUME AND HAND OVER TO AN AGENT OR WORSE YET AN ART DIRECTOR BECAUSE IT SHOWS ME AWKWARDLY POSITIONED IN THE TOTALLY NOT TRITE - NOT - AND SELDOM SEEN (YEAH, NOT AGAIN) "I'M GLANCING OVER MY SHOULDER AND TRYING TO STARE WITH "MY BEST PENETRATING STARE" STARE, IMPLICITLY CONVEYING (TO THE READERS OF MEN'S CLOTHING CATALOGS) THE DIRE NEED FOR URGENT ACTION, BUT MY EQUALLY CLEAR AND COMPELLING RELUCTANCE TO LEAVE THE SITUATION, PERSON, OR....AHHH, WHO CARES? I'M STARING AT MY BEDROOM MIRROR, AND, FRANKLY I AM KIND OF RELUCTANT TO LEAVE IT. THE LIGHTING HERE IS GREAT AND IT DOES ENHANCE MY JAWLINE, SO, IF MY MOM WOULD JUST FOR ONCE STOP "POPPING IN" EVERY SINGLE TIME I BRING A CHICK DOWN TO MY ROOM, MAYBE I COULD GET SOME FREAKI.......WAIT, HOW LONG DO YOU HAVE TO EDIT SOMETHING LIKE THIS????? THIS IS PROBABLY A GOOD TIME TO POINT OUT WHY AN ATTORNEY HAVING KNOWLEDGE OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE IN WHICH THE INCIDENT GIVING RISE TO THE CLAIM OR OTHER LEGAL PROCEEDING(S) IS FAR BETTER SUITED, ALL ELSE EQUAL, THAN AN OUT OF STATE ATTORNEY....wait, one second...."YEAH, MA, I'M STILL GIVING FREE LEGAL ADV....FREE LEGAL INFORMATION.....YEAH, I KNOW THE DIVORCE WAS FINALIZED A WHILE BACK.....IT WASN'T THAT LONG AGO AND THERE WERE OTHER MOTIONS THAT HAD.....YOU KNOW WHAT ..SHUT UP YOU'RE NOT EVEN A LAWYER..

David Bradley Dohner

David Bradley Dohner

Posted

Man, I have to go to bed because my Mother, who must have ears that are the equivalent of the Princess and the Pea's ....um, well, skin I guess, whatever.......I have chronic insomnia; was feeling more and more relaxed the more I bashed Lassen who is probably the nicest guy in the world for all I know, but who keeps that headshot up and I must, therefore, once again maintain that he assumes the risk that some jacka__ with chronic insomnia will coming along and, well, do whatever was happening there. BUT, THE MOST AWESOME THING HAPPENED WHILE MY MOM, WHO WAS PROBABLY FINISHING LIKE HER 8TH JACK AND COKE, BUT WHO CAN'T SLEEP BECAUSE THIS NETBOOK KEYPAD IS FRE_KING DEAFENING APPARENTLY. I HAVE TO MAKE THIS QUICK BUT IT'S TOO GOOD NOT TOO PASS UP, WITH OUR DISCUSSON HAVING BEEN FOCUSED ON ATTORNEYS LACKING LICENSURE BY THE STATE IN WHICH A GIVEN MATTER UNDER DISCUSSION IS PROPERLY VENUED AND ABOUT THE LAWS FOUND OR PRESUMED TO GOVERN THE MATTER WITH RESPECT TO WHICH SOMEONE HAS POSED A QUESTION: NO MORE NAMES, THOUGH, BECAUSE IT'S RUDE, THE PEOPLE TO WHOM REFERENCE SHOULD, I MEAN COULD OR MIGHT, BE MADE, ARE PROBABLY THE COOLEST AROUND, AND IT COULD END UP BEING HURTFUL WHICH MEANS THAT TOMORROW I WILL NOT BE FUNCTIONAL BECAUSE I HAVE PROBLEMS WITH GUILT. I AM AGNOSTIC, ALTHOUGH I GUESS HISTORICALLY MY FAMILY WAS NOMINALLY PROTESTANT, IF THAT'S THE ONE WHOSE MEMBERS DRINK BOURBON NOT SCOTCH, BUT I SHOULD HAVE BEEN EITHER THE ONE THAT STARTS WITH A "C" OR THE ONE WITH THE AWESOME BRISKET AND POTATO PANCAKES. IN FACT, I STARTED SEENG A RABBI FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS BECAUSE A LONG TIME AGO I WAS GOING TO MARRY THIS GIRL WHO WAS TOTALLY GOOD LOOKING, LIKE SMOKING AND WHO MADE REALLY AWESOME POTATO PANCAKES. EVERY SINGLE MALE IN HER FAMILY WAS A DOCTOR, EVEN HER SECOND COUSINS AND, WAIT A MINUTE...HOLD ON TO THAT THOUGHT.... HERE IS THE BEST PART AND WHICH MAYBE ILLUSTRATES MY POINT ALTHOUGH, TO BE TRUTHFUL I AM NOT REALLY SURE ABOUT THAT ANYMORE BECAUSE WHEN MY MOM SCREAMS LIKE SHE DOES WHEN SHE IS LOADED IT HURTS MY HEAD AND FREAKS ME OUT: BUT, HERE GOES: WE WERE TALKING (JUST GO WITH IT, IF WE WEREN'T) ABOUT HOW AN UNLICENSED OUT OF STATE ATTORNEY WHO INSISTS ON ANSWERING QUESTIONS WHICH CONCERN THE INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF ANOTHER STATE'S LAWS COULD EASILY CAUSE CONFUSION AND POTENTIALLY NOT CAUSE SOMEONE TO DO SOMETHING NOT BECAUSE OF THE ADVICE, SORRY INFORMATION WHICH HE OR SHE PROVIDED WHICH MIGHT BE TOTALLY WRONG OR MORE LIKELY, AND I HAVE SEEN A NUMBER OF SITUATIONS IN WHICH THIS OCCURRED, MIGHT BE GENERALLY TRUE BUT WHICH DOES NOT MAKE REFERENCE TO EXISTING EXCEPTIONS, WHICH WOULD PROBABLY BE WELL KNOWN TO AN ATTORNEY PRACTICING WITHIN THAT STATE ON A DAILY BASIS. SO HERE IS WHERE WE ARE... THE GUY, REMEMBER NO USING NAMES, BELOW ME AND TO MY LEFT IN THE "BOBBY BRADY" SQUARE IS THE PA LICENSED ATTORNEY WHO DOES NOT HAVE NEW YORK LICENSURE AS FAR AS I CAN TELL, AND DEFINITELY DOES NOT HAVE FLORIDA LICENSURE, BUT ALWAYS COMMENTS ON FLORIDA ISSUES WHICH NATURALLY INTERSECT WITH FLORIDA LAW. WE'VE ALREADY AGREED HE IS PROBABLY A PRETTY GOOD GUY, BUT I COMPLETELY FORGET WHY. DID SOMEONE SAY THEY KNEW HIM? WHATEVER, JUST ASSUME HE PROBABLY IS. ANYWAY, HE WAS THE FIRST, I THINK TO RESPOND TO THE QUESTION WHICH WAS ACTUALLY ABOUT NEW YORK LAW APPLIED TO A GIVEN SITUATION, BUT WHICH WAS POSTED AS A FLORIDA LAW QUESTION, NEITHER OF WHICH FACT MATTERS YET BECAUSE EITHER WAY HE WAS DIVING INTO THE POOL, NO MATTER WHAT. COULD HAVE BEEN ALASKA LAW...BRING IT ON!!!! GIVE HIM THAT, ANYWAY....I GUESS; MAYBE NOT. ANYWAY, HIS HEADSHOT ALSO HAS A FEW WORDS ON ITS BORDER WHICH LUCKILY DO NOT DISTRACT THE PERSON VIEWING SAME FROM THE SENSE OF MOTION AND ACTION CONVEYED BY THE PICTURE. THREE OF THEM SAY "PERSONAL INJURY LAWYER". HIS ANSWER TO THE QUESTION ABOUT NEW YORK LAW SAYS THAT THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS "FOR A CIVIL CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURY, 3 YEARS IN NY." WE CAN ALL FORM OUR OWN ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT HOW THAT WOULD READ IN ENGISH, JUST KIDDING, BUT I THINK IT MEANS THAT HE IS STATING AS A LAWYERE LIC

David Bradley Dohner

David Bradley Dohner

Posted

MOVING ON AS IT GETS WORSE/BETTER BECAUSE HIS HEAD SHOT KEEPS TRAVELING WITH MY, HOPEFULLY, NOT UNFAIR COMMENTARY, IT IS LIKEWISE WORTH POINTING OUT THAT THE WRONGFUL DEATH STATUTE IN NY IS GOVERNED BY A TWO YEAR PERIOD OF LIMITATIONS. I AM ON THE FENCE ON THIS ONE INSOFAR AS I DO NOT NECESSARILY SEE THE NECESSITY FOR MENTIONING THAT POINT OF DIFFERENTATION; I JUST KNOW THAT I WOULD. FURTHERING COMPLICATING MATTERS, IN THE EVENT THAT THIS MATTER THAT STARTING OUT WITH THE CAPTION " 'Nursing Home Abuse and Neglect' FL", it seems that it may be true, however, I will leave it to a New York lawyer, duly licensed and knowledgeable of such matters, to approve or disapprove of the suspicion of which I am now possessed that nursing home actions some or all of the time fall within the subgrouping of personal injury actions, specifically referred to medical negligence actions. Again, I may be wrong; I may be right. But, if I let a NY licensed atty handle it, I don't get hurt, I mean the party posing the question doesn't get hurt, even though he or she has absolutely and without question been scolded for even considering something an attorney says to be advice, more difficult considerations can suddenly come into play if an issue was not even pulled up for the most superficial examination conceivable and a sweeping generalization was thereafter thrown up on the main stage (I do not know what that means or from whence it came....a "main" stage?? I must be tired or something), with no reference whatsover to the scope of the terminology used, or conversely, and better for our hero, the extremely rigid and most narrow construction with which is has been utilized and which therefore should likewise constrain any attempt to expand it scope and/or strike any claim of misapprehension Last but not least, CHRISTMAS IN OCTOBER. Momentarily wandering away from this absurd tirade, but only momentarily, SERENDIPITY COMES STROLLING RIGHT ON BY AND CONTINUES ON DOWN THE HALL, SEEMINGLY WALKING OUT OF MY LIFE, AS QUICKLY AS SHE WALKED INTO IT....BUT,..,NO, I'M BLESSED; IT'S LIKE FINDING A LADYBUG AND SMASHING IT WITH A PENNY LYING NEXT TO IT FACE UP OR HOWEVER THAT STUPID SAYING GOES: SERENDIPITY, APPARENTLY ALSO MEANS TWINS, OR AT LEAST TWO

David Bradley Dohner

David Bradley Dohner

Posted

....MAYBE I SHOULD REPHRASE: SERENDIPIDITY, AT A MINIMUM, APPEARED JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO IN THE FORM, TANGENTIALLY ENOUGH OF A "LOS ANGELES FAMILY LAW ATTORNEY" WHO STATES (AND I HAVE NO REASON TO DOUBT HER ON THIS POINT) THAT HER NAME IS ATOUSA SAEI. TWO POINTS APPARENTLY GOES A VERY LONG WAY AND IT HAS BECOME CLEAR THAT I HAVE GROSSLY UNDERESTIMATED THE VALUE OF THESE DIGITIZED DRAGON'S TEETH, AS MS. SAEI, ESQ., SEEMINGLY DRIFTED IN THROUGH THE ETHERNET; STOPPED BY MR. LASSEN'S INTELLECTUAL WATERING HOLE, AGAIN NO OFFENSE; SOMEHOW DECIDED AS A LOS ANGELES FAMILY LAW ATTORNEY WHO I AM ALMOST POSITIVE AS I COULD NOT FIND ONE THING THE OTHER DAY WHEN HER UBIQUITOUS PRESENCE AND UNHESITATING AGREEEMENT....WITH ANY ANSWER, AS BEST I CAN DISCERN (IN ANY STATE AND ON ANY TOPIC) SPEAK VERY CLEARLY TO THE WELL-FOUNDED AND, I BELIEVE, INSTINCTUAL FEELING I HAVE THAT I SHOULD NOT DOUBT MY GUT AND SHOULD REMAIN SCARED TO FREA__G S__T ABOUT EVEN ATTEMPTING TO DATE, DESPITE THE PASSAGE OF THREE YEARS SINCE MY DIVORCE BECAME FINAL. I WILL NOW SPEND THE REMAINDER OF THE DAY STARING AT MY PHONE JUST WONDERING IF MS. SAEI'S DOPPELGANGER - YES, I WAS NOT KIDDING; THERE ARE TWO - CATHLEEN ELISABETH NORTON, ESQ., ALSO A FAMILY LAW ATTORNEY, THIS TIME HAILING FROM BEVERLY HILLS, AND WHO ALSO FLOATS FREELY AMONG THE CRAZED SCRAWLINGS OF THE FRUSTRATED; THE BAFFLED; THE JUST PLAIN ANGRY; AND THE JUMPERS WHO JUST HAVEN'T FOUND THE RIGHT BUILDING YET....LIKEWISE AGREEING WITH ALL THAT SHE SEES; NOTING NOTHING; AND APPARENTLY ENJOYING THE SURVEY OF LAW CLASS SHE APPARENTLY WAS NOT ABLE TO JOIN WHILE A LAW STUDENT..... TAKE A LOOK. IF I AM LYING, I'M DYING. LASSEN THANKS FOR BEING A GOOD SPORT. YOU HAVE GOOD HAIR, DUDE; YOU'LL GET OVER IT. BEST, DAVE DOHNER

Wills and estates topics

Top tips from attorneys

What others are asking

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.

Ask a Question

- or -

Search for lawyers by reviews and ratings.

Find a Lawyer

Browse all legal topics