Marlowe v. RUSH-HENRIETTA CENT. SCH. DIST.
This text of 78 N.Y.2d 1096 (Marlowe v. RUSH-HENRIETTA CENT. SCH. DIST.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Steven M. Marlowe, an Infant, by His Parent and Natural Guardian, Steven L. Marlowe, et al., Appellants,
v.
Rush-Henrietta Central School District et al., Respondents.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
George A. Schell for appellants.
James E. Maslyn for Rush-Henrietta Central School District, respondent.
David F. Bowen, Robert M. Shaddock and Roger G. Preston, Jr., for Derrick Nesmith, respondent.
Concur: Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges SIMONS, KAYE, TITONE, HANCOCK, JR., and BELLACOSA. Judge ALEXANDER dissents and votes to reverse for the reasons stated in the dissenting memorandum at the Appellate Division (167 AD2d 820, 820-822).
Order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum of the Appellate Division (167 AD2d 820).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
78 N.Y.2d 1096, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marlowe-v-rush-henrietta-cent-sch-dist-ny-1991.