Back to feedAnalyzed Oct 15, 2026
(Turner Construction cleared of negligence claims)CivilCourt of AppealsAppeal
Cullinan v. New York Univ.
- Court
- Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- Decided
- Oct 15, 2026
- Docket
- Index No. 159762/16|Appeal No. 7246|Case No. 2025-03672|
- Judges
- Not listed
Cited as2026 NY Slip Op 05999
Detailed analysis & 3-line summary
AI breakdown
Where this case stands
Supreme Court: denied Turner's motion for dismissing the negligence claims.
This decision · Appeal
(Turner Construction cleared of negligence claims)
TL;DR
- 1The case centers on a worker injured at a New York University construction site who is suing Turner Construction for negligence.
- 2The court a lower decision that denied Turner's dismissal request, clearing it from the lawsuit.
- 3Turner argued that recent evidence showed it wasn't responsible for the accident, which the court agreed with.
Key issues
- 1
Was Turner Construction responsible for the worker's injury?
Holding · The court found that new evidence proved Turner was not responsible, allowing their dismissal from the case.
Why it matters
This decision impacts how liability is determined in construction accidents, especially regarding evidence presented in court.
If you were the judge?
Construction company argues it isn’t to blame for a work accident. Should it be cleared?
- 1A worker was injured on a New York University construction site and sued for negligence.
- 2The construction company, Turner Construction, claimed the evidence showed it wasn't responsible for the accident.
- 3The lower court denied Turner's request to dismiss the case, leading to this appeal by the company.
Should Turner Construction be held responsible for the accident?
Vote to earn 10 Verdict Points
Parties
Appellant
Cullinan
Appellee
New York Univ.
Roles are inferred from the case caption.
Opinion of the court
Cullinan v New York Univ.
2026 NY Slip Op 05999
October 15, 2026
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
Patrick Cullinan et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents,
v
New York University, et al., Defendants-Respondents, Turner Construction Company, Defendant-Appellant. New York University sued herein as New York University and NYU School of Medicine, et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents,
Decided and Entered: October 15, 2026
Index No. 159762/16|Appeal No. 7246|Case No. 2025-03672|
Before: Webber, J.P., Friedman, Kapnick, Pitt-Burke, JJ.
Cullen and Dykman LLP, New York (Patrick Kelly of counsel), for appellant.
Law Office of Michael T. O'Leary, PLLC, Larchmont (Michael T. O'Leary of counsel), for Patrick Cullinan and Geraldine Cullinan, respondents.
Nicoletti Hornig Namazi Eckert & Sheehan, New York (Joseph Santiago of counsel), for New York University, NYU School of Medicine and New York University Langone Health Systems and NYU Langone Medical Center, respondents.
[*1]
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert R. Reed, J.), entered June 10, 2025, which denied the motion of defendant Turner Construction Company pursuant to CPLR 2221(e) for leave to renew its motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims, unanimously reversed on the law, without costs, and the motion granted, without costs.
Supreme Court improperly denied Turner's motion for leave to renew its motion for summary judgment. Evidence which emerged from the court-ordered depositions made clear that Turner was not responsible for the accident and that "the asserted new facts would change the prior determination" (American Audio Serv. Bur. Inc. v AT & T Corp., 33 AD3d 473, 476 [1st Dept 2006]).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: October 15, 2026