Curry v. Tysens Park Apartments, L. L. C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Curry v. Tysens Park Apartments, L. L. C.

289 A.D.2d 191, 733 N.Y.S.2d 907, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11786

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 3, 2001·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.), dated March 27, 2001, which granted the defendants’ motion pursuant to CPLR 510 (3) to change the venue of this action from Kings County to Richmond County.

Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, the motion is denied, and the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, is directed to deliver to the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Kings County, all papers filed in this action and certified copies of all minutes and entries (see, CPLR 511 [d]).

The Supreme Court erred in granting the defendants’ motion for a change of venue. All of the witnesses mentioned by the defendants were their own employees, whose convenience is not a factor in considering a change of venue based on CPLR 510 (3) (see, Cilmi v Greenberg Trager, Toplitz & Herbst, 273 AD2d 266). The order must therefore be reversed and the motion denied. Bracken, P. J., Krausman, Luciano, Smith and Adams, 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, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.), dated March 27, 2001, which granted the defendants’ motion pursuant to CPLR 510 (3) to change the venue of this action from Kings County to Richmond County.

Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, the motion is denied, and the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, is directed to deliver to the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Kings County, all papers filed in this action and certified copies of all minutes and entries (see, CPLR 511 [d]).

The Supreme Court erred in granting the defendants’ motion for a change of venue. All of the witnesses mentioned by the defendants were their own employees, whose convenience is not a factor in considering a change of venue based on CPLR 510 (3) (see, Cilmi v Greenberg Trager, Toplitz & Herbst, 273 AD2d 266). The order must therefore be reversed and the motion denied. Bracken, P. J., Krausman, Luciano, Smith and Adams, JJ., concur.

Curry v. Tysens Park Apartments, L. L. C., 289 A.D.2d 191, 733 N.Y.S.2d 907, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11786 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

289 A.D.2d 191 (Curry v. Tysens Park Apartments, L. L. C.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related