From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wassel v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 3, 2003
307 A.D.2d 752 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

CA 02-02808

July 3, 2003.

Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Roy, J.), entered October 18, 2002, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff's motion for a trial preference.

SUGARMAN LAW FIRM, LLP, SYRACUSE (SHERRY R. BRUCE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT AND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.

ALEXANDER CATALANO, LLC, SYRACUSE (JAMES L. ALEXANDER OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

COSTELLO, COONEY FEARON, PLLC, SYRACUSE (SHELLY DI BENEDETTO OF COUNSEL), FOR THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: HURLBUTT, J.P., SCUDDER, KEHOE, BURNS, AND GORSKI, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum:

Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in granting plaintiff's motion for a trial preference in this personal injury action on the basis of plaintiff's indigency ( see Hoyt v. Kazel, 265 A.D.2d 527, 527-528) upon its determination that the "interests of justice will be served by an early trial" (CPLR 3403 [a] [3]; see Nold v City of Troy, 94 A.D.2d 930; see also Spratt v. General Elec. Co., 242 A.D.2d 900; Wolf v. Wolf, 232 A.D.2d 330, 331). Nor, under the circumstances of this case, did the court abuse its discretion in granting that part of third-party defendant's cross motion for an order severing the third-party action from the main action for purposes of trial. The main action had been certified as trial-ready, plaintiff had been granted a preference therein, and the third-party action had recently been commenced and essential discovery therein had not yet begun ( see CPLR 603, 1010; Singh v. City of New York, 294 A.D.2d 422, 423; Ambriano v. Bowman, 245 A.D.2d 404, 405; Cusano v. Sankyo Seiki Mfg. Co., 184 A.D.2d 489, 490; Santos v. Sure Iron Works, 166 A.D.2d 571, 573).


Summaries of

Wassel v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 3, 2003
307 A.D.2d 752 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Wassel v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.

Case Details

Full title:SONYA WASSEL, AS THE ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF SCOTT L. WASSEL…

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

Date published: Jul 3, 2003

Citations

307 A.D.2d 752 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
762 N.Y.S.2d 854

Citing Cases

Whippoorwill Hills Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Toll at Whippoorwill, L.P.

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in…

Samaroo v. T-Mobile USA, Inc.

The court has considerable discretion in deciding whether severance is appropriate ( see Shanley v Callanan…