Yun-Shou Gao v. City of New York

29 A.D.3d 449, 814 N.Y.S.2d 523
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 23, 2006·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J.), entered December 8, 2005, which denied plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of defendants’ liability under Labor Law § 240 (1), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was made before any disclosure had been conducted and was properly denied in the circumstances presented (see CPLR 3212 [f]; McGlynn v Palace Co., 262 AD2d 116 [1999]). Our affirmance is without prejudice to plaintiffs’ renewal of the motion after completion of disclosure (see id.). Concur—Friedman, J.P., Sullivan, Williams, Sweeny and McGuire, JJ.

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

Yun-Shou Gao v. City of New York, 29 A.D.3d 449, 814 N.Y.S.2d 523 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

29 A.D.3d 449 (Yun-Shou Gao v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Akter v. Interboro Ins. Co.
2024 NY Slip Op 51483(U) (New York Supreme Court, Bronx County, 2024)