Daley v. Hellman

16 N.Y.S. 689, 43 N.Y. St. Rep. 25, 62 Hun 620, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2181
New York Supreme Court·Decided December 24, 1891·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Dykman. J.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion to change the place of trial from the county of Queens to the county of Hew York for the convenience of witnesses. As a general rule, motions to change the place of trial from any of the counties in the second judicial district to Hew York are denied, because such change not only fails to subserve the convenience of witnesses, but imposes great inconvenience upon parties. In this particular case the order was fully justified by the affidavits, and the convenience of both witnesses and parties will be promoted by a trial at Long Island City, in Queens county, instead of Hew York. The order should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. All concur.

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

Daley v. Hellman, 16 N.Y.S. 689, 43 N.Y. St. Rep. 25, 62 Hun 620, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2181 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1891).

16 N.Y.S. 689 (Daley v. Hellman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Broderick v. Mesa
178 A.D. 669 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1917)
Weidenfeld v. McClure
86 N.Y.S. 1150 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1903)
Quinn v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad
88 A.D. 57 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1903)
Navratil v. Bohm
26 A.D. 460 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1898)
McGready v. Haight
48 N.Y.S. 39 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1897)
McCready v. Haight
22 A.D. 632 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1897)