Home/New York Court of Appeals/Donigi v. American Cyanamid Co.

Donigi v. American Cyanamid Co.

374 N.E.2d 1245, 43 N.Y.2d 935, 403 N.Y.S.2d 894, 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 1832
New York Court of Appeals·Decided February 22, 1978·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs to respondent. Although the order of the Appellate Division is appealable, it is not reviewable. Appellant raises only a question of fact as to the weight of the evidence. Since no question of law is presented, the order of the Appellate Division lies beyond our power of review. (Pfohl v Wipperman, 34 NY2d 597; Armstrong v Campbell, 30 NY2d 704; Indiere v [937]*937Strickroth, 28 NY2d 513; see Cohen and Karger, Powers of the New York Court of Appeals [rev ed], § 148, p 588.)

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.

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

Donigi v. American Cyanamid Co., 374 N.E.2d 1245, 43 N.Y.2d 935, 403 N.Y.S.2d 894, 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 1832 (N.Y. 1978).

374 N.E.2d 1245 (Donigi v. American Cyanamid Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Batson v. Lederle Laboratories
674 A.2d 1013 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1996)
Rastelli v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
591 N.E.2d 222 (New York Court of Appeals, 1992)
Cooley v. Carter-Wallace Inc.
102 A.D.2d 642 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
Pescetti v. Mastrodominico
425 N.E.2d 893 (New York Court of Appeals, 1981)
Noia v. De Rosa
425 N.E.2d 893 (New York Court of Appeals, 1981)
Jump v. Jump
403 N.E.2d 454 (New York Court of Appeals, 1980)
Wolfgruber v. Upjohn Co.
72 A.D.2d 59 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
Ezagui v. Dow Chemical Corp.
598 F.2d 727 (Second Circuit, 1979)
Ezagui v. Dow Chemical Co.
598 F.2d 727 (Second Circuit, 1979)