Legal Opinion
St. Mary v. Paul Smith's College of Arts & Sciences
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 4, 1998No. Appeal No. 1PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Judgment unanimously reversed on the law with costs and matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in determining as a matter of law the duration of plaintiffs July 21, 1994 employment contract with defendant. “The proper inquiry in determining whether a contract is ambiguous is ‘whether the agreement on its face is reasonably susceptible of more than one interpretation’ (Chimart Assocs. v Paul, 66 NY2d 570, 573)” (Arrow Communication Labs, v Pico Prods., 206 AD2d 922, 922-923). In seeking summary judgment, each…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Chimart Associates v. PaulNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Mallad Construction Corp. v. County Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
- Arrow Communication Laboratories, Inc. v. Pico Products, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Levey v. A. Leventhal & Sons, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- Dowdle v. RichardsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1956
3Cited by12 opinions
- Maniolos v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2010
- Gross, Shuman, Brizdle & Gilfillan, P. C. v. BaygerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Gilpin v. Oswego Builders, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Sullivan v. Troser Management, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- T.L.C. West v. Fashion OutletsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.