Teodorescu v. Resnick & Binder, P.C.
925 N.E.2d 581, 14 N.Y.3d 776, 898 N.Y.S.2d 543
This text of 925 N.E.2d 581 (Teodorescu v. Resnick & Binder, P.C.) 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
Teodorescu v. Resnick & Binder, P.C., 925 N.E.2d 581, 14 N.Y.3d 776, 898 N.Y.S.2d 543 (N.Y. 2010).
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order reversed, with costs, and defendant’s motion for summary judgment denied. We hold, contrary to the Appellate Division, that plaintiff raised issues of fact regarding whether she could have prevailed on a theory of constructive notice.
Concur: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Teodorescu v. Resnick & Binder, P.C.
29 Misc. 3d 1119 (New York Supreme Court, 2010)
Washington v. Washington
925 N.E.2d 582 (New York Court of Appeals, 2010)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
925 N.E.2d 581, 14 N.Y.3d 776, 898 N.Y.S.2d 543, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/teodorescu-v-resnick-binder-pc-ny-2010.