Baker v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Baker v. City of New York

37 A.D.2d 958, 326 N.Y.S.2d 533, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2910

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

DecidedNovember 30, 1971

StatusPublished

This text of 37 A.D.2d 958 (Baker v. City of New York) 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

Baker v. City of New York, 37 A.D.2d 958, 326 N.Y.S.2d 533, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2910 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered June 1, 1971, denying motion to reconsider a prior denial of a general trial preference, unanimously reversed, on the law, on the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, without costs and without disbursements, and plaintiff’s motion for general preference granted. The affidavit of plaintiff, the medical report of Robert R. Hyman, M.D., and the alleged loss of earnings, collectively : demonstrate prima facie serious injury, possibly permanent, and a sufficient I monetary loss to warrant a general preference. (Martin v. Suarez, 30 A D 2d 947; Flores v. Santiago, 34 A D 2d 926.) Concur—Capozzoli, J. P., I McGivern, Markewich, Murphy and Eager, JJ. !

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered June 1, 1971, denying motion to reconsider a prior denial of a general trial preference, unanimously reversed, on the law, on the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, without costs and without disbursements, and plaintiff’s motion for general preference granted. The affidavit of plaintiff, the medical report of Robert R. Hyman, M.D., and the alleged loss of earnings, collectively : demonstrate prima facie serious injury, possibly permanent, and a sufficient I monetary loss to warrant a general preference. (Martin v. Suarez, 30 A D 2d 947; Flores v. Santiago, 34 A D 2d 926.) Concur—Capozzoli, J. P., I McGivern, Markewich, Murphy and Eager, JJ. !

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 A.D.2d 958, 326 N.Y.S.2d 533, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baker-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1971.