Anderson v. Belke

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Anderson v. Belke

74 A.D.3d 653, 902 N.Y.S.2d 361

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 22, 2010

StatusPublished

This text of 74 A.D.3d 653 (Anderson v. Belke) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Anderson v. Belke, 74 A.D.3d 653, 902 N.Y.S.2d 361 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.H.O.), entered July 27, 2009, which, in shareholder derivative actions, granted defendants’ motions pursuant to CPLR 510 (3) to change venue to Livingston County, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Venue was properly changed to Livingston County, where the subject corporation is headquartered, plaintiffs claims arose, and all relevant documents are located, and where or near where all parties, except plaintiff, reside (see Bohlen Indus. of N. Am. v Flint Oil & Gas, 95 AD2d 753 [1983]). Further, Livingston Supreme Court has already determined two substantially similar actions among these parties. Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Sweeny, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Motion to strike defendants’ appendix and for other relief denied. Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Sweeny, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.H.O.), entered July 27, 2009, which, in shareholder derivative actions, granted defendants’ motions pursuant to CPLR 510 (3) to change venue to Livingston County, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Venue was properly changed to Livingston County, where the subject corporation is headquartered, plaintiffs claims arose, and all relevant documents are located, and where or near where all parties, except plaintiff, reside (see Bohlen Indus. of N. Am. v Flint Oil & Gas, 95 AD2d 753 [1983]). Further, Livingston Supreme Court has already determined two substantially similar actions among these parties. Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Sweeny, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Motion to strike defendants’ appendix and for other relief denied. Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Sweeny, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 A.D.3d 653, 902 N.Y.S.2d 361, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-belke-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack