Hochman v. Zwanger

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hochman v. Zwanger

65 A.D.2d 768, 409 N.Y.S.2d 952, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13595

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

DecidedNovember 13, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 65 A.D.2d 768 (Hochman v. Zwanger) 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

Hochman v. Zwanger, 65 A.D.2d 768, 409 N.Y.S.2d 952, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13595 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., plaintiffs appeal from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered December 28, 1976, which denied, with leave to renew, their motion to increase the ad damnum clause of their complaint and to remove the action from the District Court to the Supreme Court, and (2) a further order of the same court, entered March 3, 1977, which denied the renewed motion. Appeal from the order entered December 28, 1976 dismissed, without costs or disbursements. That order was superseded by the order entered March 3, 1977. Ordér entered March 3,1977 affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Under the circumstances, it was not an abuse of discretion to deny plaintiffs’ motion to increase the ad damnum clause and remove the case from the District Court to the Supreme Court. Mollen, P. J., Latham, Damiani and Titone, 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 injuries, etc., plaintiffs appeal from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered December 28, 1976, which denied, with leave to renew, their motion to increase the ad damnum clause of their complaint and to remove the action from the District Court to the Supreme Court, and (2) a further order of the same court, entered March 3, 1977, which denied the renewed motion. Appeal from the order entered December 28, 1976 dismissed, without costs or disbursements. That order was superseded by the order entered March 3, 1977. Ordér entered March 3,1977 affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Under the circumstances, it was not an abuse of discretion to deny plaintiffs’ motion to increase the ad damnum clause and remove the case from the District Court to the Supreme Court. Mollen, P. J., Latham, Damiani and Titone, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 A.D.2d 768, 409 N.Y.S.2d 952, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13595, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hochman-v-zwanger-nyappdiv-1978.