Cannon v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cannon v. City of New York

27 A.D.3d 607, 810 N.Y.S.2d 673

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 21, 2006·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Partnow, J.), dated April 6, 2005, as denied the defendants’ cross motion pursuant to CPLR 510 (2) to transfer venue from Kings County to New York County.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The denial of the cross motion pursuant to CPLR 510 (2) to transfer venue was a provident exercise of discretion (see Krupka v County of Westchester, 160 AD2d 681 [1990]). Adams, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein, Skelos and Dillon, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Partnow, J.), dated April 6, 2005, as denied the defendants’ cross motion pursuant to CPLR 510 (2) to transfer venue from Kings County to New York County.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The denial of the cross motion pursuant to CPLR 510 (2) to transfer venue was a provident exercise of discretion (see Krupka v County of Westchester, 160 AD2d 681 [1990]). Adams, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein, Skelos and Dillon, JJ., concur.

Cannon v. City of New York, 27 A.D.3d 607, 810 N.Y.S.2d 673 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

27 A.D.3d 607 (Cannon v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related