Bagan v. Fritz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bagan v. Fritz

274 A.D. 1082, 85 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1949 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6151

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

DecidedJanuary 19, 1949

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 274 A.D. 1082 (Bagan v. Fritz) 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

Bagan v. Fritz, 274 A.D. 1082, 85 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1949 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6151 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the Supreme Court, Albany County Special Term, which changed the place of trial of the [1083]*1083action herein from County of Rensselaer to the County of Schenectady, and denied the cross motion of plaintiff to retain the place of trial in Rensselaer County. Since one of the defendants is the City of Schenectady the proper place of trial in the first instance was Schenectady County (Civ. Prae. Act, § 182-a). Whether this section must yield to the convenience of witnesses we do not need to determine on this appeal. Plaintiff has failed to advance sufficient facts to require a reversal of the discretionary order of the Special Term so far as the convenience of witnesses is concerned. Order unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Present — Poster, P. J., Heffernan, Brewster, Santry and Bergan, JJ.

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

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the Supreme Court, Albany County Special Term, which changed the place of trial of the [1083]*1083action herein from County of Rensselaer to the County of Schenectady, and denied the cross motion of plaintiff to retain the place of trial in Rensselaer County. Since one of the defendants is the City of Schenectady the proper place of trial in the first instance was Schenectady County (Civ. Prae. Act, § 182-a). Whether this section must yield to the convenience of witnesses we do not need to determine on this appeal. Plaintiff has failed to advance sufficient facts to require a reversal of the discretionary order of the Special Term so far as the convenience of witnesses is concerned. Order unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Present — Poster, P. J., Heffernan, Brewster, Santry and Bergan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

274 A.D. 1082, 85 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1949 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bagan-v-fritz-nyappdiv-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack