From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Underwood v. American Telephone and Tel. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 27, 1995
221 A.D.2d 623 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

November 27, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Becker, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the provision of the order dated June 27, 1994, which granted the motion of American Telephone and Telegraph Co. and ATT Information Systems, Inc., for summary judgment is vacated, and the motion of the defendants American Telephone and Telegraph Co. and ATT Information Systems, Inc., is denied; and it is further,

Ordered that the provision of the order dated June 27, 1994, which granted summary judgment to the defendants Leon Weinstein and Barbara Weinstein is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The proof presented by the plaintiffs, and the defendants American Telephone and Telegraph Co. and ATT Information System, Inc. (hereinafter collectively ATT) as to the installation, ownership, and maintenance of certain telephone wires "create[s] questions of fact which cannot be resolved as a matter of law" (see, Freeman Lbr. Co. v Dutton Lbr. Corp., 220 A.D.2d 641). Therefore, summary judgment should not have been granted to ATT.

We have examined the plaintiffs contentions as to the defendants Leon and Barbara Weinstein and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J.P., Sullivan, Miller and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Underwood v. American Telephone and Tel. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 27, 1995
221 A.D.2d 623 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Underwood v. American Telephone and Tel. Co.

Case Details

Full title:EVELYN UNDERWOOD et al., Appellants, v. AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH…

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

Date published: Nov 27, 1995

Citations

221 A.D.2d 623 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
635 N.Y.S.2d 493