Legal Opinion

Scheir v. Lauenborg

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

Decided March 19, 2001PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Southland Corporation, d/b/a 7/11 and/or 7-Eleven, and Texland Properties Corp. appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.), dated May 22, 2000, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellants, and the action against the remaining defendant is severed.

The plaintiff was in a convenience…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Nallan v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. Lindskog v. Southland Restaurant, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  3. Fhima v. Maimonides Medical CenterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
  4. Maruffi v. King Kullen Grocery Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Acosta v. MEC RealtyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
  2. Roberts v. Nostrand Hillel Food, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
  3. Sepulveda v. Empire of Hempstead, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
  4. Mohmand v. Shorenstein Realty Investors TwoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003

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

Powered by the Exa API