Hamill v. City of New York
420 N.E.2d 400, 52 N.Y.2d 1045, 438 N.Y.S.2d 519, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2271
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
On summary consideration, order affirmed, without costs. The Appellate Division correctly concluded that there was insufficient evidence of negligence to present a jury question, as a matter of law.
Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hamill v. City of New York, 420 N.E.2d 400, 52 N.Y.2d 1045, 438 N.Y.S.2d 519, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2271 (N.Y. 1981).
420 N.E.2d 400 (Hamill v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Turcios v. De Mesa
2020 NY Slip Op 102 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Rand v. Cornell University
91 A.D.3d 542 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Hoenig v. Shyed
284 A.D.2d 225 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Davis v. City of New York
255 A.D.2d 356 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Bernstein v. City of New York
511 N.E.2d 52 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)
Valentine v. City of New York
86 A.D.2d 381 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)