DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The defendant signed a demand note on October 13, 1989. The plaintiff's cause of action to recover on the note accrued on that day ( see UCC 3-122; Pomaro v. Quality Sheet Metal, 295 A.D.2d 416, 418). Contrary to the defendant's contentions, while this action was not commenced until February 9, 1999, it is not barred by the six-year statute of limitations ( see CPLR 213), as the defendant's partial payment on the note made in May 1995 started the statute of limitations running anew ( see Roth v. Michelson, 55 N.Y.2d 278, 281; Morris Demolition Co. v. Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 40 N.Y.2d 516, 521). In addition, although the defendant contends that the balance due under the note was orally forgiven by the plaintiff, the note is governed by the Uniform Commercial Code, which does not permit oral cancellation ( see Matter of Goggins, 227 A.D.2d 481, 482; UCC 3-104, 3-605). Thus, the Supreme Court properly awarded judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, GOLDSTEIN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.