Matter of Howard J. Donsky v Dermatology Associates of Rochester
Annotate this Case
Matter of Donsky v Dermatology Assocs. of Rochester
2003 NY Slip Op 18616 [1 AD3d 1065]
Decided on November 21, 2003
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
Decided on November 21, 2003
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., SCUDDER, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ.
1255 CA 03-00971
[*1]MATTER OF HOWARD J. DONSKY AND ELIZABETH A. ARTHUR, PETITIONERS-RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS, ORDER
v
DERMATOLOGY ASSOCIATES OF ROCHESTER, P.C., AND ROBERT W. LOSS, JR., RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS- RESPONDENTS.
Appeal and cross appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Monroe County (Stander, J.), entered November 6, 2002, which, inter alia, granted in part and denied in part respondents' motion for summary judgment.
HARTER SECREST & EMERY LLP, ROCHESTER (FRED G. ATEN, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS-RESPONDENTS.
HARRIS BEACH LLP, PITTSFORD (JOHN T. REFERMAT OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONERS-RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Entered: November 21, 2003JoAnn M. Wahl
Clerk of the Court
Decided on November 21, 2003
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., SCUDDER, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ.
1255 CA 03-00971
[*1]MATTER OF HOWARD J. DONSKY AND ELIZABETH A. ARTHUR, PETITIONERS-RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS, ORDER
v
DERMATOLOGY ASSOCIATES OF ROCHESTER, P.C., AND ROBERT W. LOSS, JR., RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS- RESPONDENTS.
Appeal and cross appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Monroe County (Stander, J.), entered November 6, 2002, which, inter alia, granted in part and denied in part respondents' motion for summary judgment.
HARTER SECREST & EMERY LLP, ROCHESTER (FRED G. ATEN, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS-RESPONDENTS.
HARRIS BEACH LLP, PITTSFORD (JOHN T. REFERMAT OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONERS-RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Entered: November 21, 2003JoAnn M. Wahl
Clerk of the Court
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
