Lew v. Luna Electric Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lew v. Luna Electric Co.

33 A.D.2d 780, 307 N.Y.S.2d 831, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2668

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

DecidedDecember 8, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 33 A.D.2d 780 (Lew v. Luna Electric 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

Lew v. Luna Electric Co., 33 A.D.2d 780, 307 N.Y.S.2d 831, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2668 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated January 17, 1968, as, upon reconsideration, adhered to its previous determinations denying their application for a general preference in trial. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law and the facts, with $10 costs and disbursements, and application granted. Under the facts disclosed in this record, we are of the view that it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny the application (McGrath v. Irving, 24 A D 2d 236, mot. for lv. to app. den. 17 N Y 2d 419; Matter of Benenati v. Tin Plate Lithographing Co., 29 A D 2d 805). Brennan, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Benjamin, Munder and Martuscello, 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, plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated January 17, 1968, as, upon reconsideration, adhered to its previous determinations denying their application for a general preference in trial. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law and the facts, with $10 costs and disbursements, and application granted. Under the facts disclosed in this record, we are of the view that it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny the application (McGrath v. Irving, 24 A D 2d 236, mot. for lv. to app. den. 17 N Y 2d 419; Matter of Benenati v. Tin Plate Lithographing Co., 29 A D 2d 805). Brennan, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Benjamin, Munder and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.2d 780, 307 N.Y.S.2d 831, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2668, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lew-v-luna-electric-co-nyappdiv-1969.