From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jacobs v. Milazzo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 31, 1959
9 A.D.2d 950 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)

Opinion

December 31, 1959


In an action to recover damages for injuries to person and property, and for medical expenses and loss of services, the appeal is from an order determining that a preference pursuant to rule 9 of the Kings County Supreme Court Rules is not warranted and that adequate compensation for the claimed injuries may be obtained in the City Court of the City of New York. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and a preference granted. This court is reluctant to disturb the discretion exercised by the Special Term in passing on preference matters, except in unusual circumstances. In this case respondents failed to submit any papers in opposition to the application for the preference, although they had had a physical examination of appellant Julia Jacobs by their own physician. Under these circumstances, the medical proof submitted by appellants was sufficient to entitle them to the preference. Wenzel, Acting P.J., Beldock, Ughetta, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Jacobs v. Milazzo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 31, 1959
9 A.D.2d 950 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)
Case details for

Jacobs v. Milazzo

Case Details

Full title:JULIA JACOBS et al., Appellants, v. FRANK MILAZZO et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Dec 31, 1959

Citations

9 A.D.2d 950 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)

Citing Cases

De Kenipp v. Rodrequiz

Her bill of particulars stated that she had suffered such injury. There is no opposing affidavit by…

Long v. Savino

The second motion, being based on additional facts and papers, was in effect a new motion. Order entered June…