Murphy v. City of New York

216 A.D.2d 110, 627 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6371
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 15, 1995
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 216 A.D.2d 110 (Murphy v. City of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Murphy v. City of New York, 216 A.D.2d 110, 627 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6371 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Salvador Collazo, J.), entered on or about January 9, 1995, which denied third-party defendant-appellant’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The deposition testimony submitted by the parties, the work records of defendant Con Edison, and the reply affidavit of third-party defendant City Wide’s supervisor raise an issue of fact whether City Wide performed resurfacing work for Con Edison in the area of the street defect that allegedly caused [111]*111plaintiff’s injuries. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Related

Murphy v. City of New York
26 A.D.3d 190 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
216 A.D.2d 110, 627 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6371, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murphy-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1995.