green
Positive treatment
4.8 score
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited "see"
Marguerite T. O'connor, as Administratrix of the Goods, Chattels and Credits of Daniel J. O'connor, Deceased v. Lee-Hy Paving Corp. And Davis E. Clem, Vincent J. Ferruzzo v. Bright Trucking Inc., Joe E. Larson and Landy of Wisconsin, Inc., Fontini Kotsonis, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Padias Kotsonis v. Superior Motor Express, Earnhardt Lumber Co. And the Estate of Kenneth Edward Bentley, Gloria Schwartz and William Schwartz v. Boston Hospital for Women, Also Known as Boston Lying in Hospital, and Luke Gillespie
(3×)
See p. 202 Infra Inherent in appellants' brief and argument is a contention that, as is claimed to be evidenced by Judge Breitel's concurrence for himself and Judge Bergan in Simpson, supra, 21 N.Y.2d at 314-16, 287 N.Y.S.2d at 640-42 , 234 N.E.2d at 674-75 , by Neuman v. Dunham, 39 N.Y.2d 999 , 387 N.Y.S.2d 240 , 355 N.E.2d 294 (1976), and by Donawitz v. Danek, 42 N.Y.2d 138, 141-42 , 397 N.Y.S.2d 592, 594-95 , 366 N.E.2d 253, 254-56 (1977), the New York Court of Appeals is disenchanted with Seider, clings to it only because of "considerations of institutional stability and the mandates of St…
examined
Cited "see"
O'Connor v. Lee-Hy Paving Corp.
(3×)
See p. 202 infra. Inherent in appellants’ brief and argument is a contention that, as is claimed to be evidenced by Judge Breitel’s concurrence for himself and Judge Bergan in Simpson, supra, 21 N.Y.2d at 314-16, 287 N.Y.S.2d at 640-42 , 234 N.E.2d at 674-75 , by Neuman v. Dunham, 39 N.Y. 2d 999 , 387 N.Y.S.2d 240 , 355 N.E.2d 294 (1976), and by Donawitz v. Danek, 42 N.Y.2d 138, 141-42 , 397 N.Y.S.2d 592, 594-95 , 366 N.E.2d 253, 254-56 (1977), the New York Court of Appeals is disenchanted with Seider , clings to it only because of “considerations of institutional stability and the manda…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Helen D. Neuman
v.
Eleanor Dunham
v.
Eleanor Dunham
New York Court of Appeals.
Jul 8, 1976.
355 N.E.2d 294
William F. McNulty, Daniel J. Coughlin and Anthony J. McNulty for appellant., Michael B. Grossman and William F. Levine for respondent.
Cited by 12 opinions | Published
[*1000] Order affirmed, without costs, on the ground of stare decisis alone (see Seider v Roth, 17 NY2d 111; Simpson v Loehmann, 21 NY2d 305; cf. People v Hobson, 39 NY2d 479, 486-491; Matter of Eckart, 39 NY2d 493, 498-502). Question certified answered in the affirmative.
Concur: Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke.