From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chaplin v. Tompkins

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Jun 7, 2019
173 A.D.3d 1662 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

464 CA 18–02257

06-07-2019

Teressa CHAPLIN and Gabrielle Chaplin, Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. Tim N. TOMPKINS, Defendant–Respondent, and West Main Street Partners, L.P., Defendant. (Appeal No. 2.)

ATHARI & ASSOCIATES, LLC, NEW HARTFORD (MO ATHARI OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFFS–APPELLANTS. ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN & MELLOTT, LLC, WHITE PLAINS (SARAH H. MORRISSEY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–RESPONDENT.


ATHARI & ASSOCIATES, LLC, NEW HARTFORD (MO ATHARI OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFFS–APPELLANTS.

ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN & MELLOTT, LLC, WHITE PLAINS (SARAH H. MORRISSEY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, NEMOYER, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously modified on the law by denying the motion in part and reinstating the complaint against defendant Tim N. Tompkins except insofar as it asserts claims for patent injuries arising from plaintiffs' exposure to lead paint, and as modified the order is affirmed without costs.

Same memorandum as in Chaplin v. Tompkins ( [appeal No. 1], 173 A.D.3d 1661, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, 2019 WL 2400519 [June 7, 2019] [4th Dept. 2019] ).


Summaries of

Chaplin v. Tompkins

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Jun 7, 2019
173 A.D.3d 1662 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

Chaplin v. Tompkins

Case Details

Full title:Teressa CHAPLIN and Gabrielle Chaplin, Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. Tim N…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Date published: Jun 7, 2019

Citations

173 A.D.3d 1662 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
173 A.D.3d 1662