Goldstein v. Imperial Coach Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Goldstein v. Imperial Coach Co.

25 A.D.2d 879, 271 N.Y.S.2d 562, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4125

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

DecidedMay 23, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 25 A.D.2d 879 (Goldstein v. Imperial Coach Co.) 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

Goldstein v. Imperial Coach Co., 25 A.D.2d 879, 271 N.Y.S.2d 562, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4125 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, medical expenses, etc., plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered December 7, 1965, as, on reconsideration, adhered to the court’s original decision denying a general preference in trial. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, without costs; motion granted; and general preference in trial directed to be aeeorded to this action. In our opinion, the jurisdictional monetary limitation of the Civil Court of the City of New York may preclude adequate recovery by plaintiffs in that court. It was, therefore, an improvident exercise of discretion to deny the application for a preference.

Beldoek, 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 a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, medical expenses, etc., plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered December 7, 1965, as, on reconsideration, adhered to the court’s original decision denying a general preference in trial. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, without costs; motion granted; and general preference in trial directed to be aeeorded to this action. In our opinion, the jurisdictional monetary limitation of the Civil Court of the City of New York may preclude adequate recovery by plaintiffs in that court. It was, therefore, an improvident exercise of discretion to deny the application for a preference.

Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 879, 271 N.Y.S.2d 562, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldstein-v-imperial-coach-co-nyappdiv-1966.