Moshiko, Inc. v. Seiger & Smith, Inc., 529 N.E.2d 420 (N.Y. 1988). · Go Syfert
Search
Moshiko, Inc. v. Seiger & Smith, Inc., 529 N.E.2d 420 (N.Y. 1988). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
44 citation events (10 in the last 25 years) across 7 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Alamia v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins., 495 F. Supp. 2d 362 (S.D.N.Y. 2007)
Treatment trajectory · 1990 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1990 2008 2026
How cited ↗
Cited for
Other citing cases5 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Moshiko, Inc.
v.
Seiger & Smith, Inc.
New York Court of Appeals.
Sep 20, 1988.
Published opinion
529 N.E.2d 420
1988 N.Y. LEXIS 2601
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Kenneth P. Fremont for appellants., Arthur N. Brook for Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, respondent., Duncan B. Hume for Seiger & Smith, Inc., and another, respondents., Leaselex Realty Corp., respondent, precluded.
Cited by 21 opinions  |  Published
1 passages pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 72%
Citer courts: S.D. New York (3)

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 of the Appellate Division insofar as it granted summary judgment to defendant Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the opinion by Justice Joseph P. Sullivan at the Appellate Division (137 AD2d 170) addressing that portion of the litigation; appeal from so much of the order insofar as it denied plaintiffs’[*948] motion for summary judgment against defendants Seiger & Smith, Inc., and Vasaka dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that that portion of the order does not finally determine the action between the affected parties within the meaning of the Constitution.

Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa.