Legal Opinion
Dunham v. Hilco Construction Company, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 27, 1995PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant second third-party plaintiff Ira S. Salk Construction Corporation appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lane, J.), dated March 4, 1994, as, upon, in effect, granting reargument, adhered to so much of a prior determination as denied those branches of its motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s causes of action based on Labor Law § 241 (6), and the plaintiff’s cause of action based on common-law negligence, and granted the plaintiff’s cross…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ross v. Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Electric Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1993
- In re HuieNew York Court of Appeals · 1967
- Price v. PalagoniaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Gordineer v. County of OrangeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. PellegrinoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Dunham v. Hilco Construction Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1996
- State v. Gruzen PartnershipAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Wensley v. Argonox Construction Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- McDonald v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996