Legal Opinion
Auqui v. Seven Thirty One Limited Partnership
New York Court of Appeals
Decided February 14, 2013PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, defendants’ motion to preclude plaintiffs* from litigating the issue of plaintiff Jose Verdugo’s accident-related disability beyond January 24, 2006 granted, and the certified question answered in the negative.
Plaintiff, a food service deliveryman, was injured on December 24, 2003 when a sheet of plywood fell from a building under construction owned by defendant Seven Thirty One Limited Partnership. Plaintiff was compensated for treatment of his head, neck, and back injuries, as well as…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- D'Arata v. New York Central Mutual Fire InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- Hinchey v. SellersNew York Court of Appeals · 1959
- Engel v. Calgon Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- Engel v. Calgon Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1987
- Brugman v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Wax Ex Rel. Wax v. 716 Realty, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Wang v. New York State Department of HealthNew York Supreme Court · 2013
- Auqui v. Seven Thirty One Ltd. PartnershipNew York Court of Appeals · 2013
- Auqui v. Seven Thirty One Ltd. PartnershipNew York Court of Appeals · 2013
- Auqui v. Seven Thirty One Ltd. PartnershipNew York Court of Appeals · 2013
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.