Legal Opinion

Miller v. Amerada Hess Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided October 31, 2000PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lorraine Miller, J.), entered June 24, 1999, which granted defendants-respondents’ motions and cross motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Summary judgment was properly granted, since here, as in Miller v Akronchem Corp. (276 AD2d 447 [decided herewith]), there was no eyewitness testimony placing the decedent in a specific area at a specific time, or placing an identifiable defendant’s product in the same area at the same time (cf., Dolias v Grace & Co., 225 AD2d 319, 320), and also, as…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Dollas v. W.R. Grace & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  2. Lechowicz v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
  3. Miller v. Akronchem Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Miller v. Amerada Hess Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
  2. Hart v. American Home ProductsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  3. Miller v. Acheson Industries Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API