Santiago v. Ruphuy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Santiago v. Ruphuy

295 A.D.2d 419, 743 N.Y.S.2d 299, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5990

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 10, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 295 A.D.2d 419 (Santiago v. Ruphuy) 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

Santiago v. Ruphuy, 295 A.D.2d 419, 743 N.Y.S.2d 299, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5990 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (LaCava, J.), entered April 11, 2001, as granted the respective motions of the defendants Ronald Ruphuy and Daniel B. Quiroz for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them, and the defendants Stephen D. Stead-man, Keith R. Taylor, and Hartford Roofing Co., Inc., separately appeal from so much of the same order as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the appeal by the defendants Stephen D. Stead-man, Keith R. Taylor, and Hartford Roofing Co., Inc., is dismissed as abandoned, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from by the plaintiffs, without costs or disbursements.

There being no issues of fact, the Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment to the defendants Ronald Ruphuy and Daniel B. Quiroz. Santucci, J.P., Altman, H. Miller and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (LaCava, J.), entered April 11, 2001, as granted the respective motions of the defendants Ronald Ruphuy and Daniel B. Quiroz for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them, and the defendants Stephen D. Stead-man, Keith R. Taylor, and Hartford Roofing Co., Inc., separately appeal from so much of the same order as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the appeal by the defendants Stephen D. Stead-man, Keith R. Taylor, and Hartford Roofing Co., Inc., is dismissed as abandoned, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from by the plaintiffs, without costs or disbursements.

There being no issues of fact, the Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment to the defendants Ronald Ruphuy and Daniel B. Quiroz. Santucci, J.P., Altman, H. Miller and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

295 A.D.2d 419, 743 N.Y.S.2d 299, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5990, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/santiago-v-ruphuy-nyappdiv-2002.