Gov. Kathy Hochul recently signed the Avoiding Vexatious Overuse of Impleading to Delay (AVOID) Act, amending CPLR § 1007 relating to third-party practice by establishing new, significantly shortened time limits for commencing third-party actions. The net effect of the Act will be to ‘front load’ litigated matters by forcing defendants to swiftly implead other potentially culpable parties. It may also force defendants to settle claims with plaintiffs and pursue contribution and indemnification claims later. The new law was signed on Dec. 19, 2025, and goes into effect April 18, 2026; it will retroactively apply to existing cases pending on that date.
Key Provisions of the AVOID Act
Under the AVOID Act, a defendant seeking to enforce contractual rights – for example, contractual indemnification or insurance procurance obligations – against third parties, must commence a third-party action within 60 days after serving an answer. A defendant seeking to enforce non-contractual rights, e.g. statutory contribution or common-law indemnification, must commence a third-party action within 60 days of becoming aware a third-party may be liable to the defendant for all or part of a plaintiff’s claim.
The Act further shortens the time period for third-party defendants to commence their own third-party actions. Specifically, the time limit for commencing a second third-party action is limited to within 45 days after service of an answer by a third-party defendant, the time limit for commencing a third third-party action is limited to within 30 days after service of an answer, and the time limit for commencing any subsequent third-party actions is limited to within 20 days after service of an answer.
The AVOID Act does allow for extensions to these time periods. The Act allows for up to a 30-day extension of the deadline without a court order if made within 12 months of filing an answer. Any extensions beyond the 12-month mark will require written consent of both the plaintiff and the court. This means the parties may only extend the deadline for filing a third-party complaint up to 30 days by stipulation, and if extending the deadline beyond 12 months after the service of an answer, both a court order and plaintiff’s consent are required.
The Act specifically prohibits the filing of any third-party action after the note of issue has been filed.
There are limited exceptions to the AVOID Act. One exception is where the third-party defendant files a third-party complaint against plaintiff’s employer either seeking contribution or indemnification for a “grave injury” as defined in the workers’ compensation law. Additionally, an exception exists if the identity of the employer of a plaintiff was not known to the defendant or otherwise identified until after the time periods had expired. In both cases, the defendant has 120 days after the later of either event.
Best Practices Moving Forward
Third-party actions are one of the most common mechanisms to enforce and ensure the proper allocation of liabilities. The AVOID Act will now require defendants to swiftly identify any persons or entities they believe may be liable to them for plaintiff’s claims, particularly if liability is based on the existence of a contractual relationship. For defendants with applicable insurance coverage, these new time constraints will also affect existing claims-handling protocols and procedures. Moving forward, defendants and their insurers must be prepared to adapt to a different third-party landscape to protect their rights:
- Early Investigation – Aggressive investigations into potentially liable parties should begin upon notice of claim or potential claim, including the use of pre-action discovery devices or subpoena powers to identify all potential third-party defendants.
- Early Filings – Third-party actions may, and in some instances should, be filed without the benefit of discovery or receipt of responses to defense and indemnity tenders to preserve risk-transfer and allocation rights. Under the AVOID Act, deferred third-party actions will be barred if not commenced within the statutory timeframe, but a third-party action that is brought timely (but later deemed unnecessary) can be easily discontinued.
- Overinclusion of Third-Party Defendants – In addition to filing early, defendants should err on the side of overinclusion of third-party defendants to preserve their ability to pursue all potential third parties.
- Secure Extensions – If additional time is needed to conduct relevant investigations and prepare third-party pleadings, extensions should be requested immediately and motions filed, if necessary.
- Multiplicity of Interrelated Lawsuits – The AVOID Act does not affect a defendant’s ability to commence independent complaints against potentially liable parties. In actions where the deadlines to commence third-party actions have elapsed, a defendant and their insurer must be prepared to prosecute separate actions to recover contribution or indemnification from third parties.
- Piecemeal Resolutions – While one of the chief benefits of third-party practice has been the convenient and economical disposition of related issues in a single proceeding, the timing constraints posed by the AVOID Act may necessitate settlement of primary actions before third-party liability is determined. This will likely delay final resolution and keep claim files open longer. Claim files should be handled in tandem in order to achieve consistent resolution.
The AVOID Act is likely to result in a significant increase in third-party claims being brought early in litigation, as well as independent claims being filed separately to enforce contractual and common-law rights. This will result in higher litigation costs for defendants, insureds and insurers. Despite these costs, defendants must be vigilant and proactive to preserve their rights. Litigants should look at their current pending cases to determine if a third-party complaint for indemnification or contribution should be filed prior to the April 18, 2026, deadline.
Our nationally-ranked Mass Torts and Industry-Wide Litigation Practice Group and Medical and Life Sciences Industry Team routinely develop and execute effective risk-transfer and allocation strategies through third-party proceedings. For more information regarding the AVOID Act and its implications on third-party practice, please contact attorney Abbie L. Eliasberg Fuchs at (212) 313-5408 and afuchs@harrisbeachmurtha.com; attorney Kelly Jones Howell at (212) 912-3652 and khowell@harrisbeachmurtha.com; attorney Sara H. Fricano at (212) 912-3637 and sfricano@harrisbeachmurtha.com, attorney Andrew J. Orenstein at (212) 313-5473 and aorenstein@harrisbeachmurtha.com; attorney Jeffery J. Sheng at (212) 313-5435 and jsheng@harrisbeachmurtha.com; or the Harris Beach Murtha attorney with whom you most frequently work.
This alert is not a substitute for advice of counsel on specific legal issues.
Harris Beach Murtha’s lawyers and consultants practice from offices throughout Connecticut in Bantam, Hartford, New Haven and Stamford; New York state in Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, Ithaca, New York City, Niagara Falls, Rochester, Saratoga Springs, Syracuse, Long Island and White Plains, as well as in Boston, Massachusetts, and Newark, New Jersey.
