Antis v. Klein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Antis v. Klein

24 A.D.2d 762, 263 N.Y.S.2d 570, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3295

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 18, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.2d 762 (Antis v. Klein) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Antis v. Klein, 24 A.D.2d 762, 263 N.Y.S.2d 570, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3295 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered April 30, 1965 on reconsideration, which adhered to the court’s original decision denying their motion for a general preference in trial. Order reversed, without costs; motion granted; and general preference .in trial directed to be accorded to this action. In view of the extent of the claimed special damages and of the medical affidavit and report establishing a 15% permanent partial disability in the use of the right knee and the fact that such claim is uneontroverted, it is our opinion that the jurisdictional monetary limitation of the Civil Court of the City of New York may preclude adequate recovery by the plaintiff in that court; hence, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny the application for a preference. Brennan, Acting P. J., Hill, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered April 30, 1965 on reconsideration, which adhered to the court’s original decision denying their motion for a general preference in trial. Order reversed, without costs; motion granted; and general preference .in trial directed to be accorded to this action. In view of the extent of the claimed special damages and of the medical affidavit and report establishing a 15% permanent partial disability in the use of the right knee and the fact that such claim is uneontroverted, it is our opinion that the jurisdictional monetary limitation of the Civil Court of the City of New York may preclude adequate recovery by the plaintiff in that court; hence, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny the application for a preference. Brennan, Acting P. J., Hill, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 762, 263 N.Y.S.2d 570, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3295, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/antis-v-klein-nyappdiv-1965.