Franklin v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Franklin v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.

306 A.D.2d 243, 760 N.Y.S.2d 332, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6217

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 2, 2003·Published

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of written and implied warranties, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Bergerman, J.), dated May 30, 2002, as denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 510 (3) to change venue of the action from Rockland County to Onondaga County.

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

The defendants failed to demonstrate that any nonparty witnesses would be inconvenienced should a change of venue be denied. Consequently, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying their motion (see Curry v Tysens Park Apts., 289 AD2d 191 [2001]; Cilmi v Greenberg, Trager, Toplitz & Herbst, 273 AD2d 266 [2000]; O’Brien v Vassar Bros. Hosp., 207 AD2d 169, 172-173 [1995]). Altman, J.P., Krausman, Gold-stein, H. Miller and Crane, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of written and implied warranties, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Bergerman, J.), dated May 30, 2002, as denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 510 (3) to change venue of the action from Rockland County to Onondaga County.

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

The defendants failed to demonstrate that any nonparty witnesses would be inconvenienced should a change of venue be denied. Consequently, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying their motion (see Curry v Tysens Park Apts., 289 AD2d 191 [2001]; Cilmi v Greenberg, Trager, Toplitz & Herbst, 273 AD2d 266 [2000]; O’Brien v Vassar Bros. Hosp., 207 AD2d 169, 172-173 [1995]). Altman, J.P., Krausman, Gold-stein, H. Miller and Crane, JJ., concur.

Franklin v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 306 A.D.2d 243, 760 N.Y.S.2d 332, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6217 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

306 A.D.2d 243 (Franklin v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related