Wilson v. Mill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wilson v. Mill

21 A.D.2d 791, 252 N.Y.S.2d 55, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3640

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

DecidedJune 1, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 21 A.D.2d 791 (Wilson v. Mill) 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

Wilson v. Mill, 21 A.D.2d 791, 252 N.Y.S.2d 55, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3640 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, loss of services and medical expenses, the plaintiffs (husband, wife and two infant children) appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 6, 1964, which denied their renewed motion (on additional papers) for a general preference in trial. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and plaintiffs’ renewed motion for a general preference in trial granted. In our opinion, under all the facts and circumstances disclosed by the additional papers submitted on this renewed application, the plaintiffs are entitled to a general preference in trial. Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hill, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, loss of services and medical expenses, the plaintiffs (husband, wife and two infant children) appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 6, 1964, which denied their renewed motion (on additional papers) for a general preference in trial. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and plaintiffs’ renewed motion for a general preference in trial granted. In our opinion, under all the facts and circumstances disclosed by the additional papers submitted on this renewed application, the plaintiffs are entitled to a general preference in trial. Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hill, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 A.D.2d 791, 252 N.Y.S.2d 55, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3640, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilson-v-mill-nyappdiv-1964.