Hill v. Andron Construction Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hill v. Andron Construction Corp.

256 A.D.2d 549, 682 N.Y.S.2d 872, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14019

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

DecidedDecember 28, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 256 A.D.2d 549 (Hill v. Andron Construction Corp.) 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

Hill v. Andron Construction Corp., 256 A.D.2d 549, 682 N.Y.S.2d 872, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14019 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Andron Construction Corporation appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Bernhard, J.), dated December 2, 1997, as granted that branch of the cross motion of the third-party defendant Katonah Roofing, Inc., which was to dismiss the third-party complaint.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

As the order appealed from does not contain a decretal paragraph granting or .denying that branch of the cross motion by the third-party defendant Katonah Roofing, Inc., seeking summary judgment dismissing the claims asserted against it by Andron Construction Corporation, that branch of the cross motion is still pending and undecided (see, Weitzenberg v Nassau County Dept. of Recreation & Parks, 249 AD2d 538; Katz v Katz, 68 AD2d 536). Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed. Miller, J. P., Ritter, Sullivan and Pizzuto, 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, etc., the defendant Andron Construction Corporation appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Bernhard, J.), dated December 2, 1997, as granted that branch of the cross motion of the third-party defendant Katonah Roofing, Inc., which was to dismiss the third-party complaint.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

As the order appealed from does not contain a decretal paragraph granting or .denying that branch of the cross motion by the third-party defendant Katonah Roofing, Inc., seeking summary judgment dismissing the claims asserted against it by Andron Construction Corporation, that branch of the cross motion is still pending and undecided (see, Weitzenberg v Nassau County Dept. of Recreation & Parks, 249 AD2d 538; Katz v Katz, 68 AD2d 536). Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed. Miller, J. P., Ritter, Sullivan and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.D.2d 549, 682 N.Y.S.2d 872, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14019, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-andron-construction-corp-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack