Case Name: Castagna & Son, Inc., Plaintiff, v. City of New York, Defendant-Respondent and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. Gruzen & Partners, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent; Wachtel, Duklauer & Fein, Inc., Appellant, v. City of New York, Defendant-Respondent and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. Gruzen & Partners, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1977-09-13
Citations: 42 N.Y.2d 1010
Docket Number: 
Parties: Castagna & Son, Inc., Plaintiff, v City of New York, Defendant-Respondent and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. Gruzen & Partners, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. Wachtel, Duklauer & Fein, Inc., Appellant, v City of New York, Defendant-Respondent and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. Gruzen & Partners, Third-Party DefendantRespondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 42
Pages: 1010–1010

Head Matter:
Castagna & Son, Inc., Plaintiff, v City of New York, Defendant-Respondent and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. Gruzen & Partners, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. Wachtel, Duklauer & Fein, Inc., Appellant, v City of New York, Defendant-Respondent and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. Gruzen & Partners, Third-Party DefendantRespondent.
Submitted July 18, 1977;
decided September 13, 1977

Opinion:
Motion for leave to appeal dismissed, with $20 costs and necessary reproduction disbursements, upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution (Cohen and Karger, Powers of the New York Court of Appeals, § 39, pp 158-159).