Edward Murphy v City of New York

Murphy v City of New York 2006 NY Slip Op 00986 [26 AD3d 190] February 7, 2006 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, April 19, 2006

Edward Murphy, Plaintiff,
v
City of New York et al., Defendants, and Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Respondent. Samruve Operating Corp. et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents, v Yellowstone Industries, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Appellant.

—[*1]Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered October 5, 2005, which denied the motion of third-party defendant-appellant Yellowstone Industries for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Issues of fact as to whether the defect in the roadway was caused in some measure by Yellowstone Industries, which performed excavation work at or near the accident site, mandated the denial of Yellowstone's summary judgment motion (see Murphy v City of New York, 216 AD2d 110 [1995]). Concur—Buckley, P.J., Marlow, Sweeny, Catterson and McGuire, JJ.