Home/Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York/MMCM Corp. v. Con Edison

MMCM Corp. v. Con Edison

186 Misc. 2d 437, 721 N.Y.S.2d 436
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedSeptember 25, 2000
StatusPublished

This text of 186 Misc. 2d 437 (MMCM Corp. v. Con Edison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

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

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

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

[438]*438Liability 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

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)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
186 Misc. 2d 437, 721 N.Y.S.2d 436, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mmcm-corp-v-con-edison-nyappterm-2000.