Laur & Mack Contracting v. DiCienzo
234 A.D.2d 1000, 652 N.Y.S.2d 561
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Laur & Mack Contracting v. DiCienzo. Read the opinion of the Court — 234 A.D.2d 999 →
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 30, 1996·No. Appeal No. 2·Published
Opinion
—Appeal from order insofar as it denied reargument unanimously dismissed and order affirmed without costs. Same Memorandum as in Laur & Mack Contr. Co. v DiCienzo ([appeal No. 1] — AD2d — [decided herewith]). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Rath, Jr., J.—Arbitration.) Present— Denman, P. J., Green, Fallon, Doerr and Balio, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Laur & Mack Contracting v. DiCienzo, 234 A.D.2d 1000, 652 N.Y.S.2d 561 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).
234 A.D.2d 1000 (Laur & Mack Contracting v. DiCienzo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.