History
  • No items yet
midpage
Horowitz v. Karron
1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6304
| N.Y. App. Div. | 1958
|
Check Treatment

Four actions, two in the Supreme Court, Putnam County, and two in the Supreme Court, New York County, were instituted as the result of a collision between two motor vehicles in Putnam County. The two New York County actions were consolidated, as were the two Putnam County actions. The instant motion by appellants, made thereafter, to consolidate the four actions for trial in Putnam County, was denied. Order reversed, without costs, and motion granted. In our opinion, respondent Bloom failed to show that such consolidation will prejudice a substantial right. (Cf. Shea v. Benjamin, 275 App. Div. 1003; Kelly v. John Vogel, Inc., 279 App. Div. 797; Littman v. Jacobowski, 2 A D 2d 898.) The order to be entered hereon may provide that respondent Bloom, as plaintiff in Action No. 3, which action was first commenced, may have the right to open and close. (Kelly v. John Vogel, Inc., supra; Lehman v. Dictograph Prods., 5 A D 2d 688.)

Nolan, P. J., Wenzel and Hallinan, JJ., concur; Beldoek and Kleinfeld, JJ., dissent and vote to affirm. Settle order on notice.

Case Details

Case Name: Horowitz v. Karron
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Apr 14, 1958
Citation: 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6304
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.