Civil Procedure · MBE-tested
Charles Flick, Respondent, v. Eastman Kodak Co., Inc., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff. Monroe Piping & Sheet Metal, Inc., Third-Party Defendant and Fourth-Party Plaintiff; Frontier Insulation/Rochester, Inc., Fourth-Party Defendant-Appellant
222 A.D.2d 1034636 N.Y.S.2d 681·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1995·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Charles Flick, Respondent, v Eastman Kodak Co., Inc., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff. Monroe Piping & Sheet Metal, Inc., Third-Party Defendant and Fourth-Party Plaintiff; Frontier Insulation/Rochester, Inc., Fourth-Party Defendant-Appellant.
(Appeal No. 2.)
[636 NYS2d 681]
[MAJORITY]
—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Same Memorandum as in Flick v Eastman Kodak Co. (222 AD2d 1033 [decided herewith]). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Rath, Jr., J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Wesley, Balio and Boehm, JJ.