From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coletto v. Keogh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 29, 1974
44 A.D.2d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 1974)

Opinion

April 29, 1974


In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the infant plaintiff and for medical expenses, etc., of his father, plaintiffs appeal from two orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, as follows: (1) from an order entered July 12, 1972, which denied their claim for a general preference; and (2) as limited by their brief, from so much of an order dated September 5, 1973, as, on reconsideration, ruled that no new or additional facts were alleged and adhered to the original decision. Appeal from order entered July 12, 1972 dismissed, without costs. Order dated September 5, 1973 reversed insofar as appealed from, without costs, and general preference granted. In determining whether a general preference should be granted, the test is whether the injuries, prima facie established by medical proof, might warrant a recovery in excess of the $10,000 jurisdictional limitation of the Civil Court of the City of New York ( Banks v. Acus Cab Corp., 39 A.D.2d 907). The order entered July 12, 1972 was superseded by the order dated September 5, 1973; therefore the appeal from the first order became academic and should be dismissed ( Spalter v. I.J. Morris, Inc., 8 A.D.2d 747). Gulotta, P.J., Hopkins, Latham, Shapiro and Cohalan, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Coletto v. Keogh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 29, 1974
44 A.D.2d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 1974)
Case details for

Coletto v. Keogh

Case Details

Full title:VITO COLETTO, an Infant, by His Father and Natural Guardian, FRANK…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 29, 1974

Citations

44 A.D.2d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 1974)

Citing Cases

Watts v. Andion

Order reversed insofar as appealed from, with $50 costs and disbursements, and, upon reargument, motion for a…

Marrone v. Pathmark Supermarket

The action is to be tried in the Supreme Court. Considering the nature and extent of the injuries claimed to…