Hill v. Sonwill Distributors, Inc.
202 A.D.2d 1057, 610 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3506
Opinion
Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly concluded that factual issues exist concerning plaintiff’s status as a special employee that preclude a grant of summary judgment to defendant (see, O’Brien v Garden Way Mfg., 72 AD2d 860; Hill v Erdle Perforating Co., 53 AD2d 1008). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Rath, Jr., J. — Summary Judgment.) Present —Denman, P. J., Green, Fallon, Callahan and Doerr, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hill v. Sonwill Distributors, Inc., 202 A.D.2d 1057, 610 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3506 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).
202 A.D.2d 1057 (Hill v. Sonwill Distributors, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hill v. Erdle Perforating Co.
53 A.D.2d 1008 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)
O'Brien v. Garden Way Manufacturing, Inc.
72 A.D.2d 860 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)