Litchhult v. Reiss
610 N.E.2d 381, 81 N.Y.2d 737, 594 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1992 N.Y. LEXIS 4393
Opinion
Motion by plaintiff Litchhult for leave to appeal dismissed for failure to demonstrate timeliness as required by section 500.11 (d) (1) (iii) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11 [d] [1] [iii]). Motion by defendant Valley Cen[738]*738tral School District for leave to appeal denied. Motion by plaintiffs Flanagan and Soltis for leave to appeal denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Litchhult v. Reiss, 610 N.E.2d 381, 81 N.Y.2d 737, 594 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1992 N.Y. LEXIS 4393 (N.Y. 1992).
610 N.E.2d 381 (Litchhult v. Reiss) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.