MAZUR v. ORLORSKY


28 Misc.2d 704 (1961)

Andrew Mazur, Plaintiff, v. Roman Orlorsky, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County.

January 5, 1961


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Zuckerman & Haber for plaintiff. Thomas J. Flood for defendant.


BENJAMIN BRENNER, J.

Motion to reconsider a denial of a rule 9 preference on the unspecified ground of unconstitutionality is denied. The injuries claimed are not of such serious or protracted nature as to require trial in this court. The inherent power to control the order of the court's litigation and the rights of jurisdictionally acceptable suitors to priority of trial has been reiterated by the Appellate Division of this Department (Kriger v....

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases