AVOID Act

How the New York State AVOID Act Affects Design Professionals

Good news for architects and engineers practicing in New York: beginning April 18, 2026, the New York State AVOID Act significantly limits the ability of parties to bring design professionals into litigation late in the process. The law is designed to reduce last-minute surprises, encourage earlier case evaluation, and promote more efficient resolution of disputes.

The AVOID Act—short for Avoiding Vexatious Overuse of Impleading to Delay—amends New York’s CPLR §1007 and substantially changes how and when third-party claims may be asserted. The new statute establishes strict deadlines for impleader practice, with particular implications for construction litigation, professional liability claims, and New York Labor Law cases.

What the AVOID Act Means for Design Professionals

1. Earlier Involvement in Litigation

Under the new law, architects and engineers are more likely to be brought into lawsuits much earlier than before. Property owners, general contractors, and other defendants can no longer wait until late-stage discovery—or even the eve of trial—to implead design professionals.

As a result, A/E firms may begin receiving tenders of defense and notices of claims shortly after a lawsuit is filed, allowing all parties to evaluate liability earlier in the process.

2. Greater Scrutiny of Contract Language

The AVOID Act distinguishes between contractual and noncontractual third-party claims, making contract language more important than ever.

Indemnification provisions, insurance procurement requirements, and risk-transfer clauses will likely be examined early in litigation. Poorly drafted or overly broad provisions may face immediate challenges, while clear and carefully constructed agreements could lead to faster claim resolution and more predictable outcomes.

3. Fewer Late-Stage Surprise Claims

One of the most significant benefits for design professionals is the reduction of unexpected claims years after project completion.

Historically, architects and engineers were sometimes added to litigation long after a case began, making it difficult to locate records, identify project participants, and mount an effective defense. The AVOID Act largely eliminates this practice, helping firms preserve evidence, maintain institutional knowledge, and take a more active role in defense strategy from the outset.

4. Increased Defensive Impleader Activity

While the Act limits late impleader, it may also encourage some parties to bring design professionals into litigation earlier as a protective measure.

Owners and contractors concerned about missing statutory deadlines may implead architects and engineers even when responsibility remains uncertain. This could result in increased motion practice early in litigation, including motions to dismiss or challenges to contractual indemnification claims.

5. Faster Insurance and Claims Response

The accelerated litigation timeline will require professional liability insurers to respond more quickly.

Carriers may need to evaluate coverage, appoint defense counsel, establish reserves, and assess exposure much earlier than under prior practice. Design firms should expect claims handling and coverage determinations to occur on a more compressed timeline.

6. Impact on Construction Defect and Labor Law Claims

The effects of the AVOID Act may be particularly significant in construction defect and Labor Law litigation.

Defendants in these cases must identify potentially responsible architects, engineers, and consultants early in the proceedings. Failure to do so could result in the loss of contribution or indemnification rights, increasing pressure on parties to investigate claims promptly and pursue earlier resolution strategies.

Practical Takeaways for Design Professionals

The AVOID Act does not create new liability for architects or engineers, but it does require firms to respond more quickly when disputes arise. To prepare for the new litigation landscape, design professionals should:

Anticipate Earlier Claims Activity

Expect tenders, notices, and third-party claims to arise sooner after a lawsuit is filed. While many professional liability claims resolve within approximately 18 to 36 months, complex multi-party disputes can still take three to five years—or longer—to fully resolve.

Notify Insurers Promptly

Potential claims should be reported to professional liability carriers as soon as disputes emerge. Early reporting helps preserve coverage and allows insurers to begin evaluating defense strategies immediately.

Preserve Project Documentation

When disputes arise, project records should be secured and preserved without delay. Early involvement in litigation makes complete and organized documentation even more valuable.

Review Contractual Risk Transfer Provisions

Now is an ideal time to review standard contract language, including:

Indemnification and Defense Provisions

  • Limit indemnification obligations to losses “to the extent caused by” the firm’s negligent acts, errors, or omissions.
  • Avoid contractual duties to defend where possible.
  • Exclude responsibility for another party’s sole negligence or gross negligence.

Insurance Requirements

  • Confirm professional liability limits remain appropriate for current project exposures.
  • Review retroactive dates and policy conditions.
  • Carefully evaluate additional insured requirements, which are often unavailable under professional liability policies.
  • Ensure insurance procurement obligations align with actual policy coverage.

Bottom Line

The New York State AVOID Act represents a significant procedural change for design professionals involved in litigation. While it does not expand the substantive liability of architects or engineers, it substantially accelerates the timeline for risk transfer, defense strategy, and insurance response.

For design firms, the message is clear: early awareness, proactive contract review, prompt claims reporting, and strong record preservation practices will be more important than ever. By preparing now, architects and engineers can better position themselves to navigate disputes efficiently and minimize the risks associated with complex construction litigation.

For more information click HERE.

Previous Post
When “No Third-Party Beneficiaries” May Not Mean What It Says: Lessons from City of Shreveport v. CDM Smith Inc.