From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Groeger v. Mifleb Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 13, 1959
9 A.D.2d 684 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)

Opinion

October 13, 1959


Appeal from an order denying an application for a preference under rule 9 of the Kings County Supreme Court Rules, unless appellant Natalie Groeger consent within a stated time to an examination by a physician designated by the court, in which event the application would be held in abeyance. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. On the basis of the medical proof submitted on the application, a denial of a preference was warranted. In the circumstances, the conditional order appealed from was within the bounds of the court's discretion. (Cf. Cunningham v. Malbin, 8 A.D.2d 949.) Nolan, P.J., Wenzel, Beldock, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Groeger v. Mifleb Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 13, 1959
9 A.D.2d 684 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)
Case details for

Groeger v. Mifleb Realty Corp.

Case Details

Full title:NATALIE GROEGER et al., Appellants, v. MIFLEB REALTY CORP., Respondent

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

Date published: Oct 13, 1959

Citations

9 A.D.2d 684 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)

Citing Cases

Sorkin v. County of Nassau

Order, dated January 18, 1962, affirmed, without costs. On the basis of the medical proof submitted the…

Parsons v. Friedman

Order of January 29, 1962 affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. In our opinion, on the basis of the…