Optic Plus Enterprises, Ltd. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc.

37 A.D.3d 1187, 827 N.Y.S.2d 923
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Optic Plus Enterprises, Ltd. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc.. Read the opinion of the Court — 37 A.D.3d 1185
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 2, 2007·No. Appeal No. 2·Published

Opinion

Appeal from an amended order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Kenneth R. Fisher, J.), entered June 30, 2006 in a breach of contract action. The amended order, insofar as appealed from, denied that part of plaintiffs motion seeking an in camera review of documents withheld by defendants on the ground of privilege, granted in part defendants’ cross motion to compel and granted a conditional order of preclusion.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal be and the same hereby [1188]*1188is unanimously dismissed without costs (see Matter of Kolasz v Levitt, 63 AD2d 777, 779 [1978]). Present—Gorski, J.P., Martoche, Smith, Green and Pine, JJ.

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

Optic Plus Enterprises, Ltd. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 37 A.D.3d 1187, 827 N.Y.S.2d 923 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

37 A.D.3d 1187 (Optic Plus Enterprises, Ltd. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kolasz v. Levitt
63 A.D.2d 777 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1978)