Legal Opinion
Joblon v. Solow
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided February 13, 1996No. 94 Civ. 0610PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SWEET, District Judge.
Plaintiffs Richard Joblon (“Joblon”) and Magdalena Joblon (collectively, “the Job-lons”) have moved for partial summary judgment under Rule 56, Fed.R.Civ.P., declaring that Section 240(1) of the Labor Law of the State of New York (McKinney 1986) (“Section 240(1)”) applies to the Joblons’ claim for damages arising out an injury suffered by Joblon while working as an electrician on property owned by defendant Sheldon H. Solow (“Solow”) and leased by defendant Avon Products, Inc. (“Avon”). Solow has moved, under the same rule, for summary judgment for indemnification…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Ross v. Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Electric Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1993
- Rocovich v. Consolidated Edison Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1991
- Lombardi v. StoutNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- Thompson v. Grumman Aerospace Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1991
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Joblon v. SolowNew York Court of Appeals · 1998
- Joblon v. SolowDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Joblon v. SolowCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- Joblon v. SolowDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Joblon v. SolowCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.