MMCM Corp. v. Con Edison

186 Misc. 2d 437, 721 N.Y.S.2d 436
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided September 25, 2000·Published

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Judgments entered October 18, 1999 reversed, without costs, and actions dismissed.

[438] Liability was improperly imposed below, since it was not shown that the interruption of plaintiffs’ electrical service resulted from defendant Con Edison’s “gross negligence or willful misconduct” as required by the defendant’s filed tariff (see, Lockwood v Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., 112 AD2d 495; Lee v Consolidated Edison Co., 98 Misc 2d 304). Moreover, there is no competent proof in the record to support the awards of damages. Since plaintiffs cannot prevail “according to the rules and principles of substantive law” (CCA 1807), the small claims actions must be dismissed.

McCooe, J. P., Gangel-Jacob and Suarez, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MMCM Corp. v. Con Edison, 186 Misc. 2d 437, 721 N.Y.S.2d 436 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

186 Misc. 2d 437 (MMCM Corp. v. Con Edison) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lockwood v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.
112 A.D.2d 495 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
Lee v. Consolidated Edison Co.
98 Misc. 2d 304 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1978)