SUFFOLK COUNTY WATER AUTH. v. LIZZA IND

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

In prior proceedings, the plaintiff had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issues of the applicable Statutes of Limitations, the appropriate accrual periods for its causes of action, and the applicability of the doctrine of nullum tempus (see, Suffolk County Water Auth. v. Zara Sons Contr. Co., 267 A.D.2d 303; Suffolk County Water Auth. v. J.D. Posillico, Inc., 267 A.D.2d 301; Suffolk County Water Auth. v. H.T. Schneider, Inc., 267 A.D.2d 300; Suffolk County Water Auth. v. Davis Constr. Corp., 267 A.D.2d 300). Accordingly, its current arguments are precluded by the doctrine of collateral estoppel (see, Schwartz v. Public Administrator of County of Bronx, 24 N.Y.2d 65).

With respect to the merits of the plaintiff's contract cause of action, we note that the parties have misapprehended the nature of the order issued by the Supreme Court. This order clearly stated that there exist issues of fact regarding causation which preclude the granting of partial summary judgment as to liability. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly determined that partial summary judgment to the plaintiff on the issue of liability is not warranted. We find no merit to the parties' arguments to the extent that they are based upon the misapprehension that partial summary judgment on the issue of liability was granted as to the damage which allegedly occurred during the progress of the work, and the ensuing maintenance period during which the contractor remained liable for any damages (see, Suffolk County Water Auth. v. J.D. Posillico, Inc., supra).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.