Six-Month Construction Claim Deadline Enforced in Dart Mechanical

Reviewed September 7, 2026.

In Dart Mechanical Corp. v. City of New York, 121 AD3d 452 (2014), the First Department enforced a six-month contractual deadline and dismissed a contractor's delay-damages claim against the City.

The deadline ran from the agency chief engineer's letter establishing substantial completion under the contract. The court found the period reasonable on that record. Payment-documentation procedures were independent of the delay claim and did not prevent the contractor from suing within the deadline.

Read the trigger, not just the number of months

The original headline could suggest the City lost a late claim; the decision instead barred the contractor's claim against the City. It does not establish that every six-month limitation is enforceable in every setting.

Review the executed agreement for substantial-completion certificates, termination notices, final-payment triggers, claim reservations and mandatory dispute steps. Record the actual triggering documents when received. A pending payment application or dispute over closeout documents does not automatically postpone a separate lawsuit deadline.

Kushnick Pallaci PLLC assists clients throughout New York with public construction contract disputes. Contact 631-752-7100 or vtp@kushnicklaw.com.

Attorney Advertising. General information, not legal advice.