Suffolk County Water Authority v. Davis Construction Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Suffolk County Water Authority v. Davis Construction Corp.

267 A.D.2d 300, 699 N.Y.S.2d 883

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

DecidedDecember 13, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 267 A.D.2d 300 (Suffolk County Water Authority v. Davis Construction Corp.) 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

Suffolk County Water Authority v. Davis Construction Corp., 267 A.D.2d 300, 699 N.Y.S.2d 883 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages based on negligence and breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated September 15, 1997, which, inter alia, granted, in part, the defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred, and denied that branch of its motion which was to dismiss the defendant’s affirmative defense based on the Statute of Limitations.

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

The Supreme Court correctly resolved the Statute of Limitations issues raised by the parties (see, Suffolk County Water Auth. v J.D. Posillico, Inc., 267 AD2d 301 [decided herewith]). Bracken, J. P., Friedmann, Goldstein and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages based on negligence and breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated September 15, 1997, which, inter alia, granted, in part, the defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred, and denied that branch of its motion which was to dismiss the defendant’s affirmative defense based on the Statute of Limitations.

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

The Supreme Court correctly resolved the Statute of Limitations issues raised by the parties (see, Suffolk County Water Auth. v J.D. Posillico, Inc., 267 AD2d 301 [decided herewith]). Bracken, J. P., Friedmann, Goldstein and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 300, 699 N.Y.S.2d 883, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/suffolk-county-water-authority-v-davis-construction-corp-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack