Legal Opinion
Ortiz v. Uhl
New York Court of Appeals
Decided February 14, 1974PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum.
The court affirms on the authority of Bidetto v. New York City Housing Auth. (25 N Y 2d 848). No basis establishing a duty of care by the defendants herein has been shown. Neither the Power Authority nor Uhl, Hall & Rich furnished Merritt with any tools, equipment or employees, or made any determination as to the methods by which the contractor should perform the required work. As in Bidetto, if there was negligence, it was that of plaintiff’s employer in the methods chosen to perform the contract work. The accident did not occur in a commonly used portion of the premises under the…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Nagel v. MetzgerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Dullard v. Berkeley Associates Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1979
- Fresquez v. Southwestern Industrial Contractors & Riggers, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1976
- Tilkins v. City of Niagara FallsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
- Dewitt v. Pizzagalli Construction Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.