Florio v. Glen Oaks Village, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Florio v. Glen Oaks Village, Inc.

25 A.D.2d 562, 267 N.Y.S.2d 687, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4837

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

DecidedFebruary 28, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 25 A.D.2d 562 (Florio v. Glen Oaks Village, Inc.) 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

Florio v. Glen Oaks Village, Inc., 25 A.D.2d 562, 267 N.Y.S.2d 687, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4837 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered August 13, 1965 upon'reconsideration, as adhered to the court’s original decision denying his application for a general preference in trial. Order, insofar as appealed from, reversed, without costs; plaintiff’s application for a preference in trial granted; and action remitted to the Trial Term for the purpose of placing it in the appropriate position on the Trial Calendar. In view of the extent of the claimed injuries and special damages sustained by plaintiff and of the medical information establishing a permanent partial disability in the use of his left leg, it is our opinion that the jurisdictional monetary limitation of the Civil Court of the City of New York may preclude adequate recovery by plaintiff in that court. Therefore, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny his preference application.

Christ, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur; Beldoek, P. J., and Hill, J., dissent and vote to affirm the order.

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, plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered August 13, 1965 upon'reconsideration, as adhered to the court’s original decision denying his application for a general preference in trial. Order, insofar as appealed from, reversed, without costs; plaintiff’s application for a preference in trial granted; and action remitted to the Trial Term for the purpose of placing it in the appropriate position on the Trial Calendar. In view of the extent of the claimed injuries and special damages sustained by plaintiff and of the medical information establishing a permanent partial disability in the use of his left leg, it is our opinion that the jurisdictional monetary limitation of the Civil Court of the City of New York may preclude adequate recovery by plaintiff in that court. Therefore, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny his preference application.

Christ, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur; Beldoek, P. J., and Hill, J., dissent and vote to affirm the order.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 562, 267 N.Y.S.2d 687, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4837, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/florio-v-glen-oaks-village-inc-nyappdiv-1966.