Naud v. De Torres

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Naud v. De Torres

38 A.D.2d 714, 329 N.Y.S.2d 557, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5665

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

DecidedJanuary 3, 1972

StatusPublished

This text of 38 A.D.2d 714 (Naud v. De Torres) 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

Naud v. De Torres, 38 A.D.2d 714, 329 N.Y.S.2d 557, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5665 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, medical expense, etc., plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered June 4, 1971, as, on reconsideration, adhered to the original decision denying them a general preference. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, with $10 costs and disbursements, and general preference granted. In our opinion it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny plaintiffs a general preference. We feel that the infant plaintiff’s allegations and claims, if proved at the trial, may entitle him to a recovery in excess of the jurisdictional monetary limitation of the lower court. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Munder, Martuscello, Latham and Christ, 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 injury, medical expense, etc., plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered June 4, 1971, as, on reconsideration, adhered to the original decision denying them a general preference. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, with $10 costs and disbursements, and general preference granted. In our opinion it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny plaintiffs a general preference. We feel that the infant plaintiff’s allegations and claims, if proved at the trial, may entitle him to a recovery in excess of the jurisdictional monetary limitation of the lower court. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Munder, Martuscello, Latham and Christ, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.2d 714, 329 N.Y.S.2d 557, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5665, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/naud-v-de-torres-nyappdiv-1972.