Order affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: Plaintiff client’s cause of action against defendant attorney for malpractice accrued, at the latest, when the áttorney-cliént relationship between them ended in 1966. (Cf., e.g., Borgia v. City of New York, 12 N Y 2d 151, 155; Siegel v. Kranis, 29 A D 2d 477, 480; see, also, Note, 18 ALR 3d 985 et seq.) Consequently, since the plaintiff’s suit for malpractice was commenced in 1970, the determination of the Appellate Division that the-plaintiff’s action was time-barred by the three-year period of limitations (CPLR 203; CPLR 214, subd. 6), though based on an earlier date of accrual, should be affirmed.

Concur: Chief Judge Fetld and Judges Burke, Brbitel, Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones and Waohtler.