Wassel v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.
307 A.D.2d 752
N.Y. App. Div.
2003
Check Treatment

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.

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 *753injury action on the basis of plaintiffs indigency (see Hoyt v Kazel, 265 AD2d 527, 527-528 [1999]) 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 AD2d 930 [1983]; see also Spratt v General Elec. Co., 242 AD2d 900 [1997]; Wolf v Wolf, 232 AD2d 330, 331 [1996]). 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 AD2d 422, 423 [2002]; Ambriano v Bowman, 245 AD2d 404, 405 [1997]; Cusano v Sankyo Seiki Mfg. Co., 184 AD2d 489, 490 [1992]; Santos v Sure Iron Works, 166 AD2d 571, 573 [1990]). Present — Hurlbutt, J.P., Scudder, Kehoe, Burns and Gorski, JJ.