From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Town of Smithtown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 29, 1995
222 A.D.2d 668 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

December 29, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.).


Ordered that the order is modified by deleting from the provision regarding Item No. 15 of the plaintiff's Combined Discovery Demand dated May 6, 1993, the words: "installation, repair, maintenance and/or inspection of Lilco equipment installed on utility poles" and substituting therefor the words: "installation of Lilco equipment installed on utility poles"; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The discovery demand should be limited to lawsuits in which Lilco was charged with negligence with respect to installation of street lighting equipment or utility poles, and should not include lawsuits charging Lilco with negligent repair, maintenance, and/or inspection. Balletta, J.P., Rosenblatt, Pizzuto, Joy and Altman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Smith v. Town of Smithtown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 29, 1995
222 A.D.2d 668 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Smith v. Town of Smithtown

Case Details

Full title:STEVEN SMITH et al., Respondents, v. TOWN OF SMITHTOWN et al., Defendants…

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

Date published: Dec 29, 1995

Citations

222 A.D.2d 668 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
636 N.Y.S.2d 661