Thompson v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Thompson v. State

138 A.D.2d 370, 525 N.Y.S.2d 586, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2114

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

DecidedMarch 7, 1988

DocketClaim No. 72042

StatusPublished

This text of 138 A.D.2d 370 (Thompson v. State) 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

Thompson v. State, 138 A.D.2d 370, 525 N.Y.S.2d 586, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2114 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

In a claim to recover damages, inter alia, for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff James Thompson while working on a public construction project, in which the State of New York served a "notice of vouching-in” upon the respondents, the State of New York appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Court of Claims (Lengyel, J.), dated June 29, 1987, as granted the respondents’ respective motion and cross motions to vacate the "notice of vouching-in”.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

[371]*371In view of the fact that the State of New York and Thompson have reached an out-of-court settlement, a decision on this appeal will not affect the rights of the parties. Nor do the issues presented by this appeal constitute an exception to the mootness doctrine. Thus, the issues raised are academic (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707; New York Pub. Interest Research Group v Regan, 91 AD2d 774, lv denied 58 NY2d 610). Bracken, J. P., Weinstein, Rubin and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

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

In a claim to recover damages, inter alia, for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff James Thompson while working on a public construction project, in which the State of New York served a "notice of vouching-in” upon the respondents, the State of New York appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Court of Claims (Lengyel, J.), dated June 29, 1987, as granted the respondents’ respective motion and cross motions to vacate the "notice of vouching-in”.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

[371]*371In view of the fact that the State of New York and Thompson have reached an out-of-court settlement, a decision on this appeal will not affect the rights of the parties. Nor do the issues presented by this appeal constitute an exception to the mootness doctrine. Thus, the issues raised are academic (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707; New York Pub. Interest Research Group v Regan, 91 AD2d 774, lv denied 58 NY2d 610). Bracken, J. P., Weinstein, Rubin and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 A.D.2d 370, 525 N.Y.S.2d 586, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2114, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thompson-v-state-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack