Bell v. Cusano

197 A.D.2d 382, 602 N.Y.S.2d 358
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 7, 1993
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 197 A.D.2d 382 (Bell v. Cusano) 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
Bell v. Cusano, 197 A.D.2d 382, 602 N.Y.S.2d 358 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Hansel McGee, J.), entered on or about July 9, 1990, which denied defendants’ motion to transfer the venue of these consolidated actions to Jefferson County, and order, same court and Justice, entered January 30, 1991, which inter alia, denied defendants’ motion to renew, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In order to have met their burden of showing that the convenience of the witnesses and the ends of justice would be served by the proposed change, defendants were required to supply the names, addresses and occupations of the witnesses whose convenience would be affected, indicate that such witnesses had been contacted and were willing to testify on their behalf, to specify the substance of each witness’ testimony and show that such testimony would be necessary and material upon the trial of the action (Jansen v Bernhang, 149 AD2d 468, 469). Defendants’ initial motion was properly denied for failure to provide these specifics (see, Dashman v Really Useful Theatre Co., 167 AD2d 325), and their motion to renew was properly denied for failure to adequately explain why the additional affidavits were not submitted in the first instance [383]*383(see, Saks v Guignard, 79 AD2d 632). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ross and Asch, JJ.

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

Related

Fernandes v. F.N. Projects, Inc.
214 A.D.2d 525 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Johnson v. Metropolitan Suburban Bus Authority
208 A.D.2d 682 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Bolling v. Metropolitan Suburban Bus Authority
205 A.D.2d 724 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Clarendon Place Corp. v. Landmark Insurance
204 A.D.2d 177 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Van Slyck v. Sane
203 A.D.2d 104 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
197 A.D.2d 382, 602 N.Y.S.2d 358, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-v-cusano-nyappdiv-1993.