midpage

Dilluvio v. City of New YorkDilluvio v. City of New York

New York Court of Appeals
Nov 30, 2000
Versions:95 N.Y.2d 928
744 N.E.2d 138
721 N.Y.S.2d 603
2000 N.Y. LEXIS 3581

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative.

The Appellate Division correctly determined that, as a matter of law, the accident did not result from an elevation-related risk (see, Bond v York Hunter Constr., 95 NY2d 883; Rocovich v Consolidated Edison Co., 78 NY2d 509, 514-515).

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley and Rosenblatt concur in memorandum.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, etc.

Case Details

Case Name: Dilluvio v. City of New York
Court Name: New York Court of Appeals
Date Published: Nov 30, 2000
Citations: 95 N.Y.2d 928; 744 N.E.2d 138; 721 N.Y.S.2d 603; 2000 N.Y. LEXIS 3581
Court Abbreviation: N.Y.
Log In