Marquardt v. McLean

New York Supreme Court

Marquardt v. McLean

23 Misc. 2d 998, 203 N.Y.S.2d 931, 1960 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2740

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1960

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 23 Misc. 2d 998 (Marquardt v. McLean) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Marquardt v. McLean, 23 Misc. 2d 998, 203 N.Y.S.2d 931, 1960 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2740 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Mario Pittoni, J.

The plaintiff’s motion for a preference pursuant to rule 151 of the Rules of Civil Practice is granted.

The defendants’ objection that the plaintiff did not seek a preference at the opening or during the term for which the case has been noticed, would if sustained, frustrate the interests of justice in this case. Therefore, in the exercise of my discretion, I am ruling against this contention. (Hanley v. Byrne Bros., 155 N. Y. S. 2d 607, 609, affd. 2 A D 2d 873 [2d Dept.].)

The objection that the preference is sought by an administratrix is without sufficient merit (Utnicki v. City of New York, 285 App. Div. 1069 [2d Dept.]). In the Utnichi case, in a similar situation, an administratrix was granted a preference on the ground of destitution.

The final objection, that there is no showing by the plaintiff of the probability of her death before the .case is reached in regular order, is also without sufficient merit. The plaintiff is now 79 years old, and according to the uncontroverted opinion of her doctor, in his supporting affidavit, she has been suffering from a weakened heart condition complicated by her advanced years, and it is unlikely that the plaintiff will live until this case reaches trial in regular order. Preference is therefore warranted (Migliorisi v. R. K. O.-Keith-Orpheum Theatres, Inc., 1 A D 2d 836 [2d Dept.]).

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

Mario Pittoni, J.

The plaintiff’s motion for a preference pursuant to rule 151 of the Rules of Civil Practice is granted.

The defendants’ objection that the plaintiff did not seek a preference at the opening or during the term for which the case has been noticed, would if sustained, frustrate the interests of justice in this case. Therefore, in the exercise of my discretion, I am ruling against this contention. (Hanley v. Byrne Bros., 155 N. Y. S. 2d 607, 609, affd. 2 A D 2d 873 [2d Dept.].)

The objection that the preference is sought by an administratrix is without sufficient merit (Utnicki v. City of New York, 285 App. Div. 1069 [2d Dept.]). In the Utnichi case, in a similar situation, an administratrix was granted a preference on the ground of destitution.

The final objection, that there is no showing by the plaintiff of the probability of her death before the .case is reached in regular order, is also without sufficient merit. The plaintiff is now 79 years old, and according to the uncontroverted opinion of her doctor, in his supporting affidavit, she has been suffering from a weakened heart condition complicated by her advanced years, and it is unlikely that the plaintiff will live until this case reaches trial in regular order. Preference is therefore warranted (Migliorisi v. R. K. O.-Keith-Orpheum Theatres, Inc., 1 A D 2d 836 [2d Dept.]).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 Misc. 2d 998, 203 N.Y.S.2d 931, 1960 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2740, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marquardt-v-mclean-nysupct-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack