Chavez v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chavez v. City of New York

37 A.D.3d 751, 829 N.Y.S.2d 907

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 37 A.D.3d 751 (Chavez 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

Chavez v. City of New York, 37 A.D.3d 751, 829 N.Y.S.2d 907 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

In two related actions, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries and wrongful death, etc., the plaintiff in both actions appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (LeVine, J.), dated February 28, 2005, as denied that branch of her motion which was to restore the actions to the tried calendar.

Ordered that order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the facts, without costs or disbursements, and that branch of the motion which was to restore the actions to the trial calendar is granted.

Under the particular circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court should have granted that branch of the motion which was to restore the actions to the trial calendar. Schmidt, J.E, Rivera, Covello and Balkin, JJ., concur.

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

In two related actions, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries and wrongful death, etc., the plaintiff in both actions appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (LeVine, J.), dated February 28, 2005, as denied that branch of her motion which was to restore the actions to the tried calendar.

Ordered that order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the facts, without costs or disbursements, and that branch of the motion which was to restore the actions to the trial calendar is granted.

Under the particular circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court should have granted that branch of the motion which was to restore the actions to the trial calendar. Schmidt, J.E, Rivera, Covello and Balkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 A.D.3d 751, 829 N.Y.S.2d 907, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chavez-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2007.