§ 207.Defendant’s absence from state or residence under false name.
Article 2. Limitations of Time · Last amended 1992 · Last verified July 21, 2026
In one sentenceTolls the limitations period while a defendant is out of New York for four months or more, or living in the state under an unknown false name, unless the plaintiff could obtain jurisdiction over the defendant without personally serving them in-state.
Full Text of CPLR 207
Text size
If, when a cause of action accrues against a person, he is without the state, the time within which the action must be commenced shall be computed from the time he comes into or returns to the state. If, after a cause of action has accrued against a person, that person departs from the state and remains continuously absent therefrom for four months or more, or that person resides within the state under a false name which is unknown to the person entitled to commence the action, the time of his absence or residence within the state under such a false name is not a part of the time within which the action must be commenced. If an action is commenced against a person described above, the time within which service must be made on such person in accordance with subdivisions (a) and (b) of section three hundred six-b of this chapter shall be computed in accordance with this section. This section does not apply:
1. while there is in force a designation, voluntary or involuntary, made pursuant to law, of a person to whom a summons may be delivered within the state with the same effect as if served personally within the state; or 2. while a foreign corporation has one or more officers or other persons in the state on whom a summons against such corporation may be served; or 3. while jurisdiction over the person of the defendant can be obtained without personal delivery of the summons to the defendant within the state.
Plain-English Summary
A plaintiff can't sue someone who can't be found or served. CPLR 207 recognizes that reality by pausing the limitations clock during the time a defendant is continuously absent from New York for four months or longer, or is living in the state under a false name the plaintiff has no way to know. If a defendant left the state before the claim accrued, the clock doesn't start until the defendant comes back.
The section carves out three situations where the toll doesn't apply, because in each of them the plaintiff never needed to find the defendant in New York to serve them. If the defendant has designated an agent for service in the state, if a foreign corporation keeps an officer or employee in New York who can accept service on its behalf, or if the plaintiff can get jurisdiction over the defendant without personally handing over the summons within New York at all (through long-arm jurisdiction or another substitute method), the absence doesn't stop the clock. The 1992 amendment adding that third exception closed a gap that had let purely in rem or long-arm claims benefit from a toll designed for cases where personal service inside the state was the only option.
Because a toll under this section can extend how long a plaintiff has to serve process along with how long they have to sue, the section also coordinates with CPLR 306-b's service deadlines, so the extra time to sue and the extra time to serve line up rather than working against each other.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does leaving New York pause the statute of limitations against a defendant?
Yes. CPLR 207 tolls the limitations period while a defendant is continuously absent from the state for four months or more, or living in the state under an unknown false name.
Does CPLR 207 apply if the defendant has a registered agent for service in New York?
No. The toll doesn't apply while a designated agent, chosen voluntarily or by law, can accept service on the defendant's behalf within the state.
What if the defendant is a corporation that always has an officer available in New York?
CPLR 207 excludes the toll for as long as a foreign corporation keeps an officer or other person in New York on whom a summons against it can be served.
Does this tolling provision help if I could get jurisdiction over the defendant without personally serving them in New York?
No. CPLR 207 doesn't apply while jurisdiction over the defendant can be obtained without personally delivering the summons within the state, since the barrier the section addresses isn't present in that situation.
Does CPLR 207 apply only to individuals, or also to corporations?
It applies to any defendant, including a foreign corporation, though the section's own exception removes the toll whenever that corporation keeps an officer or agent in New York available for service.
Advisory Committee Notes
Subparagraph 3 of this section is new. The rest of the section, with slight language changes, is identical with CPA § 19, which was substantially revised in 1943. See NY Law Rev Comm’n Rep 127, 164 (1943). The basic change effected by the revision was to make inapplicable the suspensory provisions of § 19 in all cases where constructive service of summons is by law made equivalent to personal service of summons within the state. Except for the fact that § 19 suspended the statutes of limitation in respect to in rem claims as well as claims in personam, the section seems to have operated effectively. Subparagraph 3 is added with a view to making the suspensory provisions of the section inapplicable in an action wholly in rem. The inclusion of this provision completes the development of § 19, and renders obsolete the holding in Chapin v Posner, 299 NY 31, 85 NE2d 172 (1949).
Amendment History
Add, L 1962, ch 308, § 1; amd, L 1992, ch 216, § 3, eff July 1, 1992.
Source & verification. Provision text, History, and Advisory
Committee Notes are reproduced verbatim from the Consolidated Laws of New York.
Last verified July 21, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as:statute of limitations defendant left New Yorktolling for an absent defendant New York lawsuitdefendant hiding under a false name statute of limitations