DiPizio Constr. Co., Inc. v Erie Canal Harbor Dev. Corp.
Annotate this Case
DiPizio Constr. Co., Inc. v Erie Canal Harbor Dev. Corp.
2017 NY Slip Op 04767
Decided on June 9, 2017
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 June 9, 2017
PRESENT: PERADOTTO, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, CURRAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ. (Filed June 9, 2017.)
MOTION NO. (209/17) CA 16-00194.
[*1]DIPIZIO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, AND TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v
ERIE CANAL HARBOR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. (ACTION NO. 1.)
DIPIZIO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, AND TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v
ERIE CANAL HARBOR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. (ACTION NO. 2.)
DIPIZIO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v
NEW YORK STATE URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, DOING BUSINESS AS EMPIRE STATE DEVELOPMENT, ERIE CANAL HARBOR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, SAM HOYT, THOMAS DEE AND MARK E. SMITH, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. (ACTION NO. 3.)
Decided on June 9, 2017
PRESENT: PERADOTTO, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, CURRAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ. (Filed June 9, 2017.)
MOTION NO. (209/17) CA 16-00194.
[*1]DIPIZIO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, AND TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v
ERIE CANAL HARBOR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. (ACTION NO. 1.)
DIPIZIO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, AND TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v
ERIE CANAL HARBOR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. (ACTION NO. 2.)
DIPIZIO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v
NEW YORK STATE URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, DOING BUSINESS AS EMPIRE STATE DEVELOPMENT, ERIE CANAL HARBOR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, SAM HOYT, THOMAS DEE AND MARK E. SMITH, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. (ACTION NO. 3.)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied.
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.
