Cafferty v. J & L Adikes, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cafferty v. J & L Adikes, Inc.

214 A.D.2d 531, 625 N.Y.S.2d 914, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3513

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 3, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 214 A.D.2d 531 (Cafferty v. J & L Adikes, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cafferty v. J & L Adikes, Inc., 214 A.D.2d 531, 625 N.Y.S.2d 914, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3513 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, Speer Products, Inc., appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), dated January 7, 1993, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the cross claims against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the Supreme Court properly denied its motion for summary judgment. There is a triable issue of fact concerning the appellant’s liability for placing the allegedly defective product in the marketplace (see generally, Brumbaugh v CEJJ, Inc., 152 AD2d 69). Mangano, P. J., O’Brien, Ritter, Pizzuto and Florio, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, Speer Products, Inc., appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), dated January 7, 1993, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the cross claims against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the Supreme Court properly denied its motion for summary judgment. There is a triable issue of fact concerning the appellant’s liability for placing the allegedly defective product in the marketplace (see generally, Brumbaugh v CEJJ, Inc., 152 AD2d 69). Mangano, P. J., O’Brien, Ritter, Pizzuto and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

214 A.D.2d 531, 625 N.Y.S.2d 914, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3513, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cafferty-v-j-l-adikes-inc-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack