Hladik v. Ellis Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hladik v. Ellis Hospital

90 A.D.2d 584, 456 N.Y.S.2d 129, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18648

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

DecidedOctober 7, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 90 A.D.2d 584 (Hladik v. Ellis Hospital) 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

Hladik v. Ellis Hospital, 90 A.D.2d 584, 456 N.Y.S.2d 129, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18648 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Trial Term (Walsh, Jr., J.), entered April 29, 1982 in Schenectady County, which denied plaintiffs’ motion for a preference. On April 19,1982, plaintiffs moved, pursuant to CPLR 3403 (subd [a], par 5), for a preference since their action was one for medical malpractice. Although there was no opposition to their motion, Trial Term denied it for lack of a showing of special circumstances warranting such relief. We do not construe the statute as requiring any such showing. Under CPLR 3403 (subd [a], par 5), an action to recover damages for medical malpractice is entitled to a preference. Accordingly, the order of Trial Term should be reversed and plaintiffs’ motion for a preference should be granted. Order reversed, on the law, with costs, and motion granted. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Casey, Weiss and Levine, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Trial Term (Walsh, Jr., J.), entered April 29, 1982 in Schenectady County, which denied plaintiffs’ motion for a preference. On April 19,1982, plaintiffs moved, pursuant to CPLR 3403 (subd [a], par 5), for a preference since their action was one for medical malpractice. Although there was no opposition to their motion, Trial Term denied it for lack of a showing of special circumstances warranting such relief. We do not construe the statute as requiring any such showing. Under CPLR 3403 (subd [a], par 5), an action to recover damages for medical malpractice is entitled to a preference. Accordingly, the order of Trial Term should be reversed and plaintiffs’ motion for a preference should be granted. Order reversed, on the law, with costs, and motion granted. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Casey, Weiss and Levine, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 A.D.2d 584, 456 N.Y.S.2d 129, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18648, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hladik-v-ellis-hospital-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack