ZAMANI v. RITE WAY BUILDING INDUSTRIES, INC

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs, and that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for leave to amend the complaint to include a direct cause of action against the appellant is denied.

The Supreme Court erred in allowing the plaintiff to amend his complaint to include a direct cause of action against the appellant. Even with the benefit of the relation back provision of CPLR 203 (f), the plaintiff's claim against the appellant, which is subject to a three-year limitation period ( see, CPLR 214), was untimely when the third-party action against the appellant for contribution was commenced ( see, CPLR 214; Liverpool v. Arverne Houses, 67 N.Y.2d 878; Dormitory Auth. v. Baker, Jr., of N.Y., 218 A.D.2d 515, 516; cf., Duffy v. Horton Mem. Hosp., 66 N.Y.2d 473).

Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Santucci, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.