Coletto v. Keogh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Coletto v. Keogh

44 A.D.2d 712, 354 N.Y.S.2d 702, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5135

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

DecidedApril 29, 1974

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 44 A.D.2d 712 (Coletto v. Keogh) 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

Coletto v. Keogh, 44 A.D.2d 712, 354 N.Y.S.2d 702, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5135 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a negligence action to recover damages Infant plaintiff and for medical expenses, etc., of his father, plaintiffs appeal from two orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, as follows t (1) from an order entered July 12, '1972, which denied' their claim for a general [713]*713preference; and (2) as limited by their brief, from so much of an order dated September 5, 1973, as, on reconsideration, ruled that no new or additional facts were alleged and adhered to the original decision. Appeal from order entered July 12, 1972 dismissed, without costs. Order dated September 5, 1973 reversed insofar as appealed from, without costs, and general preference granted. In determining whether a general preference should be granted, the test is whether the injuries, prima facie established by medical proof, might warrant a recovery in excess of the $10,009 jurisdictional limitation of the , Civil Court of the City of New York (Banks v. Acus Cab Corp., 39 A D 2d 907). The order entered July 12, 1972 was superseded by the order dated September 5, 1973; therefore the appeal from the first order became academic and should be dismissed (Spalter v. I. J. Morris, Inc., 8 A D 2d 747). Grulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Latham, Shapiro and Cohalan, 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 Infant plaintiff and for medical expenses, etc., of his father, plaintiffs appeal from two orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, as follows t (1) from an order entered July 12, '1972, which denied' their claim for a general [713]*713preference; and (2) as limited by their brief, from so much of an order dated September 5, 1973, as, on reconsideration, ruled that no new or additional facts were alleged and adhered to the original decision. Appeal from order entered July 12, 1972 dismissed, without costs. Order dated September 5, 1973 reversed insofar as appealed from, without costs, and general preference granted. In determining whether a general preference should be granted, the test is whether the injuries, prima facie established by medical proof, might warrant a recovery in excess of the $10,009 jurisdictional limitation of the , Civil Court of the City of New York (Banks v. Acus Cab Corp., 39 A D 2d 907). The order entered July 12, 1972 was superseded by the order dated September 5, 1973; therefore the appeal from the first order became academic and should be dismissed (Spalter v. I. J. Morris, Inc., 8 A D 2d 747). Grulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Latham, Shapiro and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 A.D.2d 712, 354 N.Y.S.2d 702, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5135, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coletto-v-keogh-nyappdiv-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack