General

City of Niagara Falls, Respondent, v. Paul M. Rudolph et al., Defendants, and Albert Elia Building Company, Inc., Appellant. (And a ThirdParty Action.)

99 A.D.2d 676·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1984·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

City of Niagara Falls, Respondent, v Paul M. Rudolph et al., Defendants, and Albert Elia Building Company, Inc., Appellant. (And a Third-Party Action.) [MAJORITY] Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Under all of the circumstances we cannot say that it was an abuse of discretion to stay the execution of summary judgment granted to defendant in its third counterclaim pending a determination of plaintiff’s action against defendant (see Marine Midland Bank v Stukey, 55 NY2d 633). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Ostrowski, J. —partial summary judgment.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Denman, Boomer and Moule, JJ.