Parsons v. Friedman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Parsons v. Friedman

17 A.D.2d 639, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8681

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

DecidedJuly 2, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 17 A.D.2d 639 (Parsons v. Friedman) 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

Parsons v. Friedman, 17 A.D.2d 639, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8681 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiff appeals: [640]*640(a) from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 29, 1962, which, upon reconsideration, denied plaintiff’s motion, made pursuant to rule 9 of the Kings County Supreme Court Rules, for a preference in trial; and (b) from the order [of Oct. 2, 1959] “ entered upon the decision denying plaintiff a preference”. [The misdescription in the first mentioned order and in the notice of appeal with respect thereto, will be disregarded (Civ. Prac. Act, § 105)]. Order of January 29, 1962 affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. In our opinion, on the basis of the medical proof submitted, the Special Term properly denied the preference (cf. Groeger v. Mifleb Realty Corp., 9 A D 2d 684; Cunningham v. Malbin, 8 A D 2d 949). Plaintiff’s appeal from the second mentioned order is dismissed; it was superseded by the later order of January 29, 1962. Beldock, P. J., Brennan, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiff appeals: [640]*640(a) from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 29, 1962, which, upon reconsideration, denied plaintiff’s motion, made pursuant to rule 9 of the Kings County Supreme Court Rules, for a preference in trial; and (b) from the order [of Oct. 2, 1959] “ entered upon the decision denying plaintiff a preference”. [The misdescription in the first mentioned order and in the notice of appeal with respect thereto, will be disregarded (Civ. Prac. Act, § 105)]. Order of January 29, 1962 affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. In our opinion, on the basis of the medical proof submitted, the Special Term properly denied the preference (cf. Groeger v. Mifleb Realty Corp., 9 A D 2d 684; Cunningham v. Malbin, 8 A D 2d 949). Plaintiff’s appeal from the second mentioned order is dismissed; it was superseded by the later order of January 29, 1962. Beldock, P. J., Brennan, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A.D.2d 639, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8681, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parsons-v-friedman-nyappdiv-1962.