Teitelbaum v. Colin

2 A.D.2d 879, 156 N.Y.S.2d 232, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4018

This text of 2 A.D.2d 879 (Teitelbaum v. Colin) 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
Teitelbaum v. Colin, 2 A.D.2d 879, 156 N.Y.S.2d 232, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4018 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1956).

Opinion

Order denying plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration of the denial for a preference, and order denying plaintiffs’ motion for a preference, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without prejudice to a new application on adequate papers. There is no affidavit of the doctor who treated plaintiff. The affidavit of the neurologist is insufficient, for among other things it fails to show when the examination was had. Nor does this affidavit establish any causal connection between the accident and plaintiff’s alleged ailments. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Botein, Rabin, Frank and Valente, JJ. [See post, p. 966.]

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 A.D.2d 879, 156 N.Y.S.2d 232, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4018, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/teitelbaum-v-colin-nyappdiv-1956.