Stevens v. Bridge Auto Renting Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stevens v. Bridge Auto Renting Corp.

262 A.D. 872, 28 N.Y.S.2d 326

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 18, 1941·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Order denying plaintiff’s motion for a preference in the trial of a tort action reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, without costs, and the case set down for trial five days after the entry of the order hereon. It is the established rule that where a person is on relief and, therefore, a public charge, such person is entitled to a preference in the trial of a tort action on the ground of destitution. (Auchello v. Brooklyn Bus Corp., 257 App. Div. 857, and cases cited therein.) The denial of the motion was an improvident exercise of discretion. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Order denying plaintiff’s motion for a preference in the trial of a tort action reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, without costs, and the case set down for trial five days after the entry of the order hereon. It is the established rule that where a person is on relief and, therefore, a public charge, such person is entitled to a preference in the trial of a tort action on the ground of destitution. (Auchello v. Brooklyn Bus Corp., 257 App. Div. 857, and cases cited therein.) The denial of the motion was an improvident exercise of discretion. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

Stevens v. Bridge Auto Renting Corp., 262 A.D. 872, 28 N.Y.S.2d 326 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

262 A.D. 872 (Stevens v. Bridge Auto Renting Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related