Freedman v. Black

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Freedman v. Black

23 A.D.2d 770, 258 N.Y.S.2d 563, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4453

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

DecidedApril 12, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A.D.2d 770 (Freedman v. Black) 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

Freedman v. Black, 23 A.D.2d 770, 258 N.Y.S.2d 563, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4453 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injury, medical expenses and loss of services, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered December 10, 1964 upon reconsideration after a hearing, which denied their motion for a general preference in trial pursuant to Court rules, such denial being based, inter alla, upon the ground that the female plaintiff had refused to submit to a medical examination by an impartial physician. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements; motion granted unconditionally; and general preference in trial directed to be accorded to this action. On this record, it is our opinion that by uneontradieted proof the plaintiffs made a clear prima facie showing of injuries which might properly suppont a verdict in excess of $10,000, Hence, it was an improvident exercise [771]*771of discretion to deny the general preference (Schiavone v. Laviano, 22 A D 2d 684). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injury, medical expenses and loss of services, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered December 10, 1964 upon reconsideration after a hearing, which denied their motion for a general preference in trial pursuant to Court rules, such denial being based, inter alla, upon the ground that the female plaintiff had refused to submit to a medical examination by an impartial physician. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements; motion granted unconditionally; and general preference in trial directed to be accorded to this action. On this record, it is our opinion that by uneontradieted proof the plaintiffs made a clear prima facie showing of injuries which might properly suppont a verdict in excess of $10,000, Hence, it was an improvident exercise [771]*771of discretion to deny the general preference (Schiavone v. Laviano, 22 A D 2d 684). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 770, 258 N.Y.S.2d 563, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4453, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/freedman-v-black-nyappdiv-1965.