Case Name: City of Niagara Falls, Respondent, v. Paul M. Rudolph et al., Defendants, and Albert Elia Building Company, Inc., Appellant. (And a ThirdParty Action.)
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1984-01-27
Citations: 99 A.D.2d 676
Docket Number: 
Parties: City of Niagara Falls, Respondent, v Paul M. Rudolph et al., Defendants, and Albert Elia Building Company, Inc., Appellant. (And a Third-Party Action.)
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 99
Pages: 676–676

Head Matter:
City of Niagara Falls, Respondent, v Paul M. Rudolph et al., Defendants, and Albert Elia Building Company, Inc., Appellant. (And a Third-Party Action.)

Opinion:
Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Under all of the circumstances we cannot say that it was an abuse of discretion to stay the execution of summary judgment granted to defendant in its third counterclaim pending a determination of plaintiff's action against defendant (see Marine Midland Bank v Stukey, 55 NY2d 633). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Ostrowski, J. —partial summary judgment.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Denman, Boomer and Moule, JJ.