Blake v. University of Rochester

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Blake v. University of Rochester

288 A.D.2d 118, 733 N.Y.S.2d 347, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11118

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 20, 2001·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered May 21, 2001, which denied defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 510 (3) for a change of venue to Monroe County, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly denied for failure to describe the substance and explain the materiality of the expected testimony of the only witness who defendant asserts would be inconvenienced by a trial in New York County (see, Pellegrino v File, 283 AD2d 266; Moye v H.L. Green, Inc., 159 AD2d 242). In addition, both plaintiff and his treating physician reside in New York County. Concur — Tom, J. P., Andrias, Lerner, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered May 21, 2001, which denied defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 510 (3) for a change of venue to Monroe County, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly denied for failure to describe the substance and explain the materiality of the expected testimony of the only witness who defendant asserts would be inconvenienced by a trial in New York County (see, Pellegrino v File, 283 AD2d 266; Moye v H.L. Green, Inc., 159 AD2d 242). In addition, both plaintiff and his treating physician reside in New York County. Concur — Tom, J. P., Andrias, Lerner, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

Blake v. University of Rochester, 288 A.D.2d 118, 733 N.Y.S.2d 347, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11118 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

288 A.D.2d 118 (Blake v. University of Rochester) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related