Court Opinion

ID: 5673030
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-12 14:18:11.166133+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:39:40.696331
License: Public Domain

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jacobson, J.), dated April 25, 2003, which denied her motion for a trial preference pursuant to CPLR 3403 (a) (3).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion, with costs, and the motion is granted.
The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff’s motion for a trial preference on the ground of her indigency (see CPLR 3403 [a] [3]; Hoyt v Kazel, 265 AD2d 527, 528 [1999]; Cenname v Lindholm, 69 AD2d 848, 849 [1979]). It is undisputed that the plaintiff is receiving public assistance, food stamps, and medical assistance due to her indigency. Under the circumstances of this case, the plaintiff’s application for a trial preference should have been granted (see Hoyt v Kazel, supra). Altman, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Mastro, JJ., concur.