Barbero v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Barbero v. City of New York

16 A.D.2d 770, 227 N.Y.S.2d 958, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9535

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

DecidedMay 22, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 16 A.D.2d 770 (Barbero 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

Barbero v. City of New York, 16 A.D.2d 770, 227 N.Y.S.2d 958, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9535 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, entered on March 7, 1962, denying plaintiff a preference under rule 151 of the Rules of Civil Practice, unanimously reversed, on the law, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and the matter remanded to Special Term for further consideration, with leave to plaintiff to file an affidavit of merit. Plaintiff, presently about 80 years of age, has suffered three coronary attacks, and the affidavit of plaintiff’s physician states unequivocally his opinion that plaintiff is unlikely to survive a long delay in this case coming to trial. This combination of age and uncontroverted medical proof of plaintiff’s physical condition would seem to warrant the granting of a preference (Dodumoff v. Lyons, 4 A D 2d 626) if the other requisite, an affidavit of merit, were supplied. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Valente, Stevens, Eager and Steuer, JJ.

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

Order, entered on March 7, 1962, denying plaintiff a preference under rule 151 of the Rules of Civil Practice, unanimously reversed, on the law, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and the matter remanded to Special Term for further consideration, with leave to plaintiff to file an affidavit of merit. Plaintiff, presently about 80 years of age, has suffered three coronary attacks, and the affidavit of plaintiff’s physician states unequivocally his opinion that plaintiff is unlikely to survive a long delay in this case coming to trial. This combination of age and uncontroverted medical proof of plaintiff’s physical condition would seem to warrant the granting of a preference (Dodumoff v. Lyons, 4 A D 2d 626) if the other requisite, an affidavit of merit, were supplied. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Valente, Stevens, Eager and Steuer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.2d 770, 227 N.Y.S.2d 958, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9535, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barbero-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1962.