Search for: "United States v. Consolidated Edison Co. of NY" Results 1 - 5 of 5
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Jul 2010, 5:03 am
That is, an accord and satisfaction requires a "dispute as to the amount due and knowing acceptance by the creditor of a lesser amount" (Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y. v Jet Asphalt Corp., 132 AD2d 296, 303 [1987]; see Marine Midland Bank v Scallen, 161 AD2d 103, 105 [1990]). [read post]
26 Apr 2009, 6:17 am by Scott J. Kreppein, Esq.
Consolidated Edison Co., 78 N.Y.2d 509, 514 (1991)(the risk of stepping in a bucket of oil is not a gravity-related risk and thus not protected against by the statute) Van Amerogen v Donnini, 78 N.Y.2d 880, 880 (1991)( “The [one- or two-family dwelling] exception may be extended only so far as statutory language warrants, and all doubts should be resolved in favor of statute's general provision rather than exception”). [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 4:44 am
United Illuminating, 1998 WL 910271, at *10 (Conn. [read post]
26 Jun 2022, 12:28 am by Bill Henderson
”  Joseph Durso, “Chronicling Splendor and Its Dissolution,” NY Times, Aug 30, 1998. [read post]