John Timmins v Tishman Construction Corp.
Annotate this Case
Timmins v Tishman Constr. Corp.
2004 NYSlipOp 04256
Decided on May 27, 2004
Appellate Division, First 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 May 27, 2004
Buckley, P.J., Sullivan, Williams, Gonzalez, JJ.
2864
[*1]John Timmins, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents,
v
Tishman Construction Corp., et al., Defendants-Appellants, Bayside Fencing, Inc., Defendant.
Weidenbaum & Harari, LLP, New York (Allan H. Carlin of
counsel), for appellants.
Tabak, Mellusi & Shisha, New York (Jacob Shisha of counsel),
for respondents.
Decided on May 27, 2004
Buckley, P.J., Sullivan, Williams, Gonzalez, JJ.
2864
[*1]John Timmins, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents,
v
Tishman Construction Corp., et al., Defendants-Appellants, Bayside Fencing, Inc., Defendant.
Weidenbaum & Harari, LLP, New York (Allan H. Carlin of
counsel), for appellants.
Tabak, Mellusi & Shisha, New York (Jacob Shisha of counsel),
for respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula J. Omansky, J.), entered June 24, 2003, reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and defendants-appellants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint granted. The Clerk is directed
to enter judgment accordingly.
Opinion by Sullivan, J. All concur.
Order filed.
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.
