On December 19, 2025, Governor Kathy Hochul signed the Avoiding Vexatious Overuse of Impleading to Delay (AVOID) Act into law, significantly reshaping third-party practice in New York State.
Effective April 18, 2026, the Act imposes strict time limits on impleading third parties who may bear responsibility for all or some of the claims in a litigation, requiring defendants to identify and pursue potential third-party claims much earlier than previously required.
Prior to the AVOID Act, CPLR § 1007 afforded defendants considerable flexibility in third-party practice, permitting impleader of a person or entity who may be liable for all or part of the plaintiff's claim at any time before trial, subject to the court’s discretion and the general consideration that the impleader would not unduly delay the proceedings or prejudice the parties. Although the Legislature expressed concern that this flexibility encouraged late impleaders, it also served an important purpose by allowing defendants sufficient time to investigate the underlying facts, review contractual relationships, depose key witnesses, and evaluate potential third-party claims before determining whether another party should be brought into the action.
The AVOID Act largely eliminates that flexibility. As amended, CPLR § 1007 provides that, absent very limited exceptions, “[a] defendant shall not file a third-party summons and complaint more than ninety days after serving its answer without an order of the court.” The consequences for missing that deadline are significant, as the statute states that “[a]n action filed in violation of this subdivision shall be severed or dismissed with prejudice.” Moreover, if a third-party action is severed and the defendant later commences a separate action against the third party, “any motion to consolidate such action shall not be permitted.” The Act also codifies the longstanding judicial practice of prohibiting impleader after filing of trial scheduling orders, providing that “[n]o third-party summons and complaint may be filed after the filing of a note of issue unless upon good cause shown or in the interest of justice.”
The practical effect of these amendments is substantial. Defendants can no longer wait until document discovery and depositions clarify the factual record before deciding whether to assert third-party claims. Instead, they must front-load their investigation and promptly review documents and question relevant witnesses to determine whether a third party potentially bears any responsibility, including any contractual or indemnification obligations, often before they have obtained meaningful discovery from plaintiff or other named parties.
The AVOID Act further leaves several questions unanswered. For example, what circumstances will constitute “good cause” sufficient to permit impleader after the ninety-day deadline under the Act? Likewise, where a third-party action is severed and consolidation is prohibited, questions remain regarding the coordination of discovery, the potential for inconsistent verdicts, and the preclusive effect of findings made in the original action. These and other issues are likely to generate significant motion practice and appellate guidance as courts interpret the new statute.
Until that guidance develops, practitioners should assume that the ninety-day deadline will be strictly enforced. Defense counsel should calendar the deadline immediately upon serving an answer and promptly investigate all potential contribution, indemnification, and other third-party claims to avoid forfeiting potentially valuable rights under the amended CPLR.
Blog Editors
Authors
Associate