Reisner v. New York Kosher Provisions, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Reisner v. New York Kosher Provisions, Inc.

20 A.D.2d 519, 244 N.Y.S.2d 484, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2781

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

DecidedDecember 5, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 20 A.D.2d 519 (Reisner v. New York Kosher Provisions, Inc.) 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

Reisner v. New York Kosher Provisions, Inc., 20 A.D.2d 519, 244 N.Y.S.2d 484, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2781 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, entered on September 4, 1963, denying plaintiffs-appellants’ motion for reconsideration of prior denial of motion for a special rule preference, unanimously reversed, on the law and on the facts, without costs, and motion for a preference granted. A sufficient showing of gravity of injury is made to indicate such permanent and protracted disability as to warrant “ a possible evaluation in an amount beyond the jurisdiction ” of the Civil Court. (Liebowitz v. Rector, etc., of Trinity Church, 13 A D 2d 734; see, also, Leary v. City of New York, 15 A D 2d 480; Williams v. Veer, 14 A D 2d 670; Calanni v. Tranos, 12 A D 2d 762.) Medical reports show among other things that plaintiff Pauline Reisner suffered a comminuted fracture of the greater tuberosity of the left humerus with a subcoraeoid dislocation of the left shoulder and injury to the peripheral nerves of the left upper extremity with some resulting permanent restriction of motion and with associated cardiac symptoms. Concur—Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Yalente, Stevens and Bergan, JJ.

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

Order, entered on September 4, 1963, denying plaintiffs-appellants’ motion for reconsideration of prior denial of motion for a special rule preference, unanimously reversed, on the law and on the facts, without costs, and motion for a preference granted. A sufficient showing of gravity of injury is made to indicate such permanent and protracted disability as to warrant “ a possible evaluation in an amount beyond the jurisdiction ” of the Civil Court. (Liebowitz v. Rector, etc., of Trinity Church, 13 A D 2d 734; see, also, Leary v. City of New York, 15 A D 2d 480; Williams v. Veer, 14 A D 2d 670; Calanni v. Tranos, 12 A D 2d 762.) Medical reports show among other things that plaintiff Pauline Reisner suffered a comminuted fracture of the greater tuberosity of the left humerus with a subcoraeoid dislocation of the left shoulder and injury to the peripheral nerves of the left upper extremity with some resulting permanent restriction of motion and with associated cardiac symptoms. Concur—Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Yalente, Stevens and Bergan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.2d 519, 244 N.Y.S.2d 484, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2781, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reisner-v-new-york-kosher-provisions-inc-nyappdiv-1963.