Gunning v. Buffalo Transit Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gunning v. Buffalo Transit Co.

20 A.D.2d 966, 249 N.Y.S.2d 999, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4045

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

DecidedApril 10, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 20 A.D.2d 966 (Gunning v. Buffalo Transit 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

Gunning v. Buffalo Transit Co., 20 A.D.2d 966, 249 N.Y.S.2d 999, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4045 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, without costs of this appeal to any party and motion granted in accordance with memorandum, without costs. Memorandum: — The order denied a motion of the defendant Buffalo Transit Company for an order severing the cause of action in the complaint against it and .the codefendant, McGrath. The complaint alleges a single cause of action to recover damages for -personal injuries allegedly sustained in separate automobile accidents which occurred nearly 15 months apart. Unlike Potter v. Clark (19 A D 2d 585) upon the record before us, we do not find that this is the type of ease which “ particularly lends itself to a single trial.” In the exercise of reasonable discretion the -motion should have been granted to the extent of directing plaintiff to serve amended complaints setting forth each cause of action separately. (Appeal from order of Erie Special Term denying motion to sever causes of action set forth in complaint.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Henry, Noonan and Del Vecchio, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed, without costs of this appeal to any party and motion granted in accordance with memorandum, without costs. Memorandum: — The order denied a motion of the defendant Buffalo Transit Company for an order severing the cause of action in the complaint against it and .the codefendant, McGrath. The complaint alleges a single cause of action to recover damages for -personal injuries allegedly sustained in separate automobile accidents which occurred nearly 15 months apart. Unlike Potter v. Clark (19 A D 2d 585) upon the record before us, we do not find that this is the type of ease which “ particularly lends itself to a single trial.” In the exercise of reasonable discretion the -motion should have been granted to the extent of directing plaintiff to serve amended complaints setting forth each cause of action separately. (Appeal from order of Erie Special Term denying motion to sever causes of action set forth in complaint.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Henry, Noonan and Del Vecchio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.2d 966, 249 N.Y.S.2d 999, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4045, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gunning-v-buffalo-transit-co-nyappdiv-1964.