Tobias v. New York Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tobias v. New York Hospital

279 A.D.2d 374, 719 N.Y.S.2d 563, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 670

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

DecidedJanuary 23, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 279 A.D.2d 374 (Tobias v. New York Hospital) 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

Tobias v. New York Hospital, 279 A.D.2d 374, 719 N.Y.S.2d 563, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 670 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley Sklar, J.), entered April 20, 1999, which transferred this action to the Civil Court of the City of New York, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Transfer from Supreme Court to Civil Court was appropriate in this case (CPLR 325 [d]; 22 NYCRR 202.13). Plaintiff will sustain no prejudice by reason of the transfer. The action was commenced in the Supreme Court and it is the monetary jurisdiction of that court that will govern any recovery (CPLR 325 [d]; Samuels v Cauldwell-Wingate Co., 262 AD2d 178). We have examined plaintiff’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Tom, Ellerin and Friedman, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley Sklar, J.), entered April 20, 1999, which transferred this action to the Civil Court of the City of New York, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Transfer from Supreme Court to Civil Court was appropriate in this case (CPLR 325 [d]; 22 NYCRR 202.13). Plaintiff will sustain no prejudice by reason of the transfer. The action was commenced in the Supreme Court and it is the monetary jurisdiction of that court that will govern any recovery (CPLR 325 [d]; Samuels v Cauldwell-Wingate Co., 262 AD2d 178). We have examined plaintiff’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Tom, Ellerin and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

279 A.D.2d 374, 719 N.Y.S.2d 563, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 670, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tobias-v-new-york-hospital-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack