Bustamante v. Gonzalez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bustamante v. Gonzalez

67 A.D.2d 901, 412 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10668

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

DecidedFebruary 5, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 67 A.D.2d 901 (Bustamante v. Gonzalez) 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

Bustamante v. Gonzalez, 67 A.D.2d 901, 412 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10668 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 5, 1978, which, upon reargument, granted the plaintiffs motion for a general preference. Action remitted to Mr. Justice Hirsch at Special Term to hear and report as to whether the plaintiff has complied with the terms and conditions of Mr. Justice Cone’s order dated January 26, 1978. In the interim the appeal is held in abeyance. The record is inadequate for this court to determine whether the plaintiff has complied with the conditions contained in the above-mentioned order of Mr. Justice Cone. Mollen, P. J., Hopkins, Rabin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

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

— In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 5, 1978, which, upon reargument, granted the plaintiffs motion for a general preference. Action remitted to Mr. Justice Hirsch at Special Term to hear and report as to whether the plaintiff has complied with the terms and conditions of Mr. Justice Cone’s order dated January 26, 1978. In the interim the appeal is held in abeyance. The record is inadequate for this court to determine whether the plaintiff has complied with the conditions contained in the above-mentioned order of Mr. Justice Cone. Mollen, P. J., Hopkins, Rabin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

67 A.D.2d 901, 412 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10668, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bustamante-v-gonzalez-nyappdiv-1979.