Mech v United Cerebral Palsy & Handicapped Children's Assn. of Syracuse, Inc.

Annotate this Case
Mech v United Cerebral Palsy & Handicapped Children's Assn. of Syracuse, Inc. 2015 NY Slip Op 09486 Decided on December 23, 2015 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 December 23, 2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND WHALEN, JJ.
1307 CA 15-00875

[*1]AMY MECH, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF ALLISON MECH, AN INFANT, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

v

UNITED CEREBRAL PALSY AND HANDICAPPED CHILDREN'S ASSOCIATION OF SYRACUSE, INC., ENABLE, INC., AND EXPLORING YOUR WORLD, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. ————————————————————————- UNITED CEREBRAL PALSY AND HANDICAPPED CHILDREN'S ASSOCIATION OF SYRACUSE, INC., ENABLE, INC., AND EXPLORING YOUR WORLD, THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, MASON CORPORATION, THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.



DEFRANCISCO & FALGIATANO LAW FIRM, SYRACUSE (JEAN MARIE WESTLAKE OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.

GOLDBERG SEGALLA LLP, GARDEN CITY (MOLLY RYAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS AND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS.

WOODS OVIATT GILMAN LLP, ROCHESTER (JAMES P. MCELHENY OF COUNSEL), FOR THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.



Appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Deborah H. Karalunas, J.), entered August 12, 2014. The order granted the motion of defendants for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and granted the motion of third-party defendant for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint.

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: December 23, 2015

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.