Legal Opinion
Violette v. Armonk Associates, L.P.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided December 10, 1992No. 90 Civ. 4059 (RWS)PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SWEET, District Judge.
The plaintiffs, James Violette (“Violette”) and Loretta Violette (“Mrs. Violette”) (collectively, the “Violettes”) have moved for summary judgment against defendants Armonk Associates, L.P. (“Armonk”), CMC Realty and Development, Inc. (“CMC”), Carol Management Corp. (“Carol”) and Elmar Contracting Corp. (“Elmar”) to establish liability of the defendants under New York Labor Law § 240(1). Defendants Armonk, CMC, and Carol have cross-moved against Elmar for indemnity. For the reasons set forth below, the motion of the Violettes is denied, and the cross-motion of…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Rocovich v. Consolidated Edison Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1991
- Albano v. KirbyNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- Mordkofsky v. V.C.V. Development Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1990
- Caddy v. . Interborough Rapid Transit Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1909
- Mack v. Altmans Stage Lighting Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Violette v. Armonk Associates, L.P.District Court, S.D. New York · 1993
- Violette v. Armonk Associates, L.P.District Court, S.D. New York · 1995
- Joblon v. SolowDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Hodges v. Boland's Excavating & Topsoil, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Violette v. Armonk Associates, L.P.District Court, S.D. New York · 1994
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.