From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Precision Electro Minerals v. Dryden Mutual

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 28, 2001
286 A.D.2d 922 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

(1056) CA 01-00812.

September 28, 2001.

(Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Fricano, J. — Summary Judgment.)

PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., HAYES, WISNER, KEHOE AND BURNS, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum:

Supreme Court properly denied the motion of defendant Consolidated Rail Corporation, a/k/a Conrail, Conrail, Inc. (Conrail), for summary judgment on its counterclaim seeking contractual indemnification from plaintiff, Precision Electro Minerals Company, Inc. (Precision), with leave to renew following additional discovery. Whether the injuries of Conrail's employee were caused by a "nonstandard condition" within the meaning of section 7.2 of the contract between Conrail and Precision presents a factual issue that cannot be resolved on this record ( see generally, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562).


Summaries of

Precision Electro Minerals v. Dryden Mutual

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 28, 2001
286 A.D.2d 922 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Precision Electro Minerals v. Dryden Mutual

Case Details

Full title:PRECISION ELECTRO MINERALS CO., INC., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. DRYDEN…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Sep 28, 2001

Citations

286 A.D.2d 922 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
730 N.Y.S.2d 907