Santiago v. Bristol

735 N.E.2d 1286, 95 N.Y.2d 848, 713 N.Y.S.2d 520, 2000 N.Y. LEXIS 1787
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedJuly 6, 2000
StatusPublished

This text of 735 N.E.2d 1286 (Santiago v. Bristol) 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.

Bluebook
Santiago v. Bristol, 735 N.E.2d 1286, 95 N.Y.2d 848, 713 N.Y.S.2d 520, 2000 N.Y. LEXIS 1787 (N.Y. 2000).

Opinion

Motion for leave to appeal denied. The Court of Appeals restates the rule that denial of a motion for leave to appeal is not equivalent to an affirmance and has no precedential value (see, e.g., Matter of Marchant v Mead-Morrison Mfg. Co., 252 NY 284, 297-298).

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

Related

Marchant v. Mead-Morrison Manufacturing Co.
169 N.E. 386 (New York Court of Appeals, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
735 N.E.2d 1286, 95 N.Y.2d 848, 713 N.Y.S.2d 520, 2000 N.Y. LEXIS 1787, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/santiago-v-bristol-ny-2000.