Rubin v. Grossman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rubin v. Grossman

34 A.D.2d 680, 310 N.Y.S.2d 395

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

DecidedApril 20, 1970

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 34 A.D.2d 680 (Rubin v. Grossman) 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

Rubin v. Grossman, 34 A.D.2d 680, 310 N.Y.S.2d 395 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 23, 1969, which granted plaintiff’s motion to consolidate a personal injury action and wrongful death action, both arising out of the same accident. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements; and motion denied, without prejudice to a renewal on a proper medical affidavit. In the absence of medical proof showing the causal relationship between the accident and the subsequent death of plaintiff’s intestate, a motion to consolidate a personal injury action and a wrongful death action may not be granted {Augenbra/wn v. O é B Distributors, 17 A D 2d 785; ef. McCarthy v. Downes, 17 A D 2d 919). Plaintiff may renew the motion to consolidate upon submitting competent medical proof of such causal connection (cf. Augenbraun v. [681]*681G & B Distributors, supra; McCarthy v. Downes, supra). Christ, P. J., Hopkins, Munder, Latham and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 23, 1969, which granted plaintiff’s motion to consolidate a personal injury action and wrongful death action, both arising out of the same accident. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements; and motion denied, without prejudice to a renewal on a proper medical affidavit. In the absence of medical proof showing the causal relationship between the accident and the subsequent death of plaintiff’s intestate, a motion to consolidate a personal injury action and a wrongful death action may not be granted {Augenbra/wn v. O é B Distributors, 17 A D 2d 785; ef. McCarthy v. Downes, 17 A D 2d 919). Plaintiff may renew the motion to consolidate upon submitting competent medical proof of such causal connection (cf. Augenbraun v. [681]*681G & B Distributors, supra; McCarthy v. Downes, supra). Christ, P. J., Hopkins, Munder, Latham and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

34 A.D.2d 680, 310 N.Y.S.2d 395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rubin-v-grossman-nyappdiv-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack