Diamond v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Diamond v. City of New York

22 A.D.2d 694, 254 N.Y.S.2d 89, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3074

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

DecidedOctober 19, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 22 A.D.2d 694 (Diamond 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

Diamond v. City of New York, 22 A.D.2d 694, 254 N.Y.S.2d 89, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3074 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, etc., plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, made May 12, 1964 upon reconsideration, which adhered to the original decision and denied their motion for a preference in trial, pursuant to the rules of this court regu[695]*695lating such preferences. Order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur; Kleinfeld, J., dissents and votes to reverse the order and to grant the motion on the ground that, in view of the uncontradicted proof submitted by plaintiffs, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny the preference.

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 injury, etc., plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, made May 12, 1964 upon reconsideration, which adhered to the original decision and denied their motion for a preference in trial, pursuant to the rules of this court regu[695]*695lating such preferences. Order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur; Kleinfeld, J., dissents and votes to reverse the order and to grant the motion on the ground that, in view of the uncontradicted proof submitted by plaintiffs, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny the preference.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.2d 694, 254 N.Y.S.2d 89, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3074, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/diamond-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1964.