Stashin v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stashin v. City of New York

22 A.D.2d 685, 253 N.Y.S.2d 389, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3146

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

DecidedOctober 5, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 22 A.D.2d 685 (Stashin v. City of New York) 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

Stashin v. City of New York, 22 A.D.2d 685, 253 N.Y.S.2d 389, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3146 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injury, loss of services and medical expenses, the City of New York and certain other of the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, made January 21,1964 on the court’s own motion after a pretrial hearing, which granted plaintiffs a preference in trial pursuant to rule 8 of the Kings County Supreme Court Rules, and directed that the action be placed on the Ready Day Calendar for a date certain. Order reversed, without costs, and preference vacated, without prejudice to a future application for a preference in trial, if plaintiffs be so advised. In our opinion, the record does not contain sufficient evidence to show that at the pretrial hearing defendants acted arbitrarily and not in good faith with respect to settlement of the action. If so advised, plaintiffs may apply for a preference under rule 8 of the Rules of the Supreme Court, Kings County, either upon papers on a formal motion for such relief or upon some [686]*686stenographic or other iecord indicating adequate grounds for. the granting of a preference (Wolff v. Laverne, Inc., 17 A D 2d 213). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Brennan, 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 injury, loss of services and medical expenses, the City of New York and certain other of the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, made January 21,1964 on the court’s own motion after a pretrial hearing, which granted plaintiffs a preference in trial pursuant to rule 8 of the Kings County Supreme Court Rules, and directed that the action be placed on the Ready Day Calendar for a date certain. Order reversed, without costs, and preference vacated, without prejudice to a future application for a preference in trial, if plaintiffs be so advised. In our opinion, the record does not contain sufficient evidence to show that at the pretrial hearing defendants acted arbitrarily and not in good faith with respect to settlement of the action. If so advised, plaintiffs may apply for a preference under rule 8 of the Rules of the Supreme Court, Kings County, either upon papers on a formal motion for such relief or upon some [686]*686stenographic or other iecord indicating adequate grounds for. the granting of a preference (Wolff v. Laverne, Inc., 17 A D 2d 213). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.2d 685, 253 N.Y.S.2d 389, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stashin-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1964.