RJ Taylor Gen. Contr., Inc. v Fairport Cent. Sch. Dist.
Annotate this Case
RJ Taylor Gen. Contr., Inc. v Fairport Cent. Sch. Dist.
2012 NY Slip Op 06692
Decided on October 5, 2012
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 October 5, 2012
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.
929 CA 12-00350
[*1]RJ TAYLOR GENERAL CONTRACTING, INC., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT,
v
FAIRPORT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT-RESPONDENT.
Appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Matthew A. Rosenbaum, J.), entered May 20, 2011. The order denied the motion of plaintiff for partial summary judgment and denied the cross motion of defendant for summary judgment.
LINDENFELD LAW FIRM, P.C., CAZENOVIA (HARRIS LINDENFELD OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT-RESPONDENT.
GATES & ADAMS, P.C., ROCHESTER (DANIEL P. ADAMS OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court.
Entered: October 5, 2012
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
Decided on October 5, 2012
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.
929 CA 12-00350
[*1]RJ TAYLOR GENERAL CONTRACTING, INC., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT,
v
FAIRPORT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT-RESPONDENT.
Appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Matthew A. Rosenbaum, J.), entered May 20, 2011. The order denied the motion of plaintiff for partial summary judgment and denied the cross motion of defendant for summary judgment.
LINDENFELD LAW FIRM, P.C., CAZENOVIA (HARRIS LINDENFELD OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT-RESPONDENT.
GATES & ADAMS, P.C., ROCHESTER (DANIEL P. ADAMS OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court.
Entered: October 5, 2012
Frances E. Cafarell
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.
