Tytel v. Battery Beer Distributors, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tytel v. Battery Beer Distributors, Inc.

194 A.D.2d 330, 598 N.Y.S.2d 227, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5523

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

DecidedJune 3, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 194 A.D.2d 330 (Tytel v. Battery Beer Distributors, Inc.) 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

Tytel v. Battery Beer Distributors, Inc., 194 A.D.2d 330, 598 N.Y.S.2d 227, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5523 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered September 16, 1992, which denied plaintiffs’ motion for a special trial preference, unanimously reversed, on the law, the motion granted, with costs, and an immediate trial ordered.

It is undisputed that the injured plaintiff in this negligence action is 75 years of age. In denying plaintiff a trial preference, the motion court overlooked the mandatory language of CPLR 3403 (a) (4), which provides for such a preference "in any action” upon the application of a party who has reached age 70. The 1962 decision in Brier v Plaut (37 Misc 2d 476), cited as contrary authority by the motion court, no longer has any pertinence, in light of the 1970 and 1979 amendments to the above-mentioned rule which removed the preference entitlement from the exercise of judicial discretion once the threshold age of the litigant is shown (see, 4 Weinstein-KornMiller, NY Civ Prac If 3403.18). Concur—Carro, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Ross and Rubin, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered September 16, 1992, which denied plaintiffs’ motion for a special trial preference, unanimously reversed, on the law, the motion granted, with costs, and an immediate trial ordered.

It is undisputed that the injured plaintiff in this negligence action is 75 years of age. In denying plaintiff a trial preference, the motion court overlooked the mandatory language of CPLR 3403 (a) (4), which provides for such a preference "in any action” upon the application of a party who has reached age 70. The 1962 decision in Brier v Plaut (37 Misc 2d 476), cited as contrary authority by the motion court, no longer has any pertinence, in light of the 1970 and 1979 amendments to the above-mentioned rule which removed the preference entitlement from the exercise of judicial discretion once the threshold age of the litigant is shown (see, 4 Weinstein-KornMiller, NY Civ Prac If 3403.18). Concur—Carro, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Ross and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

194 A.D.2d 330, 598 N.Y.S.2d 227, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tytel-v-battery-beer-distributors-inc-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack