Arbel v. Turgeon Restaurants of Niagara Falls, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Arbel v. Turgeon Restaurants of Niagara Falls, Inc.

124 A.D.2d 769, 508 N.Y.S.2d 487, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 62087

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

DecidedNovember 24, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 124 A.D.2d 769 (Arbel v. Turgeon Restaurants of Niagara Falls, Inc.) 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

Arbel v. Turgeon Restaurants of Niagara Falls, Inc., 124 A.D.2d 769, 508 N.Y.S.2d 487, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 62087 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

[770]*770Under the circumstances of this case, involving an incident which occurred in a Niagara County restaurant, the convenience of material witnesses and the ends of justice will be promoted by changing the venue of this action from Kings County to Niagara County (see, Olownia v Toussaint, 98 AD2d 716; Burch v Phillips, 88 AD2d 896; CPLR 510 [3]). Furthermore, in light of the fact that discovery has not been completed and the lack of any specific prejudice to the plaintiffs, we conclude that the appellant acted within a reasonable time after the commencement of the action in requesting the change of venue. Thompson, J. P., Niehoff, Weinstein and Spatt, JJ., concur.

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

[770]*770Under the circumstances of this case, involving an incident which occurred in a Niagara County restaurant, the convenience of material witnesses and the ends of justice will be promoted by changing the venue of this action from Kings County to Niagara County (see, Olownia v Toussaint, 98 AD2d 716; Burch v Phillips, 88 AD2d 896; CPLR 510 [3]). Furthermore, in light of the fact that discovery has not been completed and the lack of any specific prejudice to the plaintiffs, we conclude that the appellant acted within a reasonable time after the commencement of the action in requesting the change of venue. Thompson, J. P., Niehoff, Weinstein and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

124 A.D.2d 769, 508 N.Y.S.2d 487, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 62087, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arbel-v-turgeon-restaurants-of-niagara-falls-inc-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack