Doran v. Johnson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Doran v. Johnson

37 A.D.2d 846, 326 N.Y.S.2d 102, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3321

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

DecidedOctober 12, 1971

StatusPublished

This text of 37 A.D.2d 846 (Doran v. Johnson) 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

Doran v. Johnson, 37 A.D.2d 846, 326 N.Y.S.2d 102, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3321 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries and loss of services, plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 2, 1971, as, upon reconsideration, adhered to the original decision denying a general preference. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of $10 costs and disbursements jointly against respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs, and general preference granted. In our opinion, plaintiff made a satisfactory prima facie showing of injuries which could properly support a verdict in excess of $10,000. Under these circumstances, the denial of a general preference was not indicated. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Latham, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, 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 and loss of services, plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 2, 1971, as, upon reconsideration, adhered to the original decision denying a general preference. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of $10 costs and disbursements jointly against respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs, and general preference granted. In our opinion, plaintiff made a satisfactory prima facie showing of injuries which could properly support a verdict in excess of $10,000. Under these circumstances, the denial of a general preference was not indicated. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Latham, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 A.D.2d 846, 326 N.Y.S.2d 102, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doran-v-johnson-nyappdiv-1971.