Tuesca v. Rando Mach. Corp., 678 N.E.2d 497 (NY 1997). · Go Syfert
Search
Tuesca v. Rando Mach. Corp., 678 N.E.2d 497 (NY 1997). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Cesar Tuesca, Respondent,
v.
Rando MacHine Corp., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant, Et Al., Defendant. American White Cross Laboratories, Third-Party Defendant-Appellant
New York Court of Appeals.
Feb 13, 1997.
678 N.E.2d 497
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Fiedelman & Hoefling, Jericho (William D. Buckley of counsel), for Rando Machine Corp., defendant and third-party plaintiff-appellant., Quirk & Bakalor, P. C., New York City (Richard H. Bakalor of counsel), for American White Cross Laboratories, third-party defendant-appellant., Rosenberg, Mine & Armstrong, New York City (Steven C. Falkoff of counsel), for respondent.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published

[*968] OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question answered in the affirmative, for the reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division (226 AD2d 157).

Concur: Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick and Wesley.