Hirshkind v. Mayer

91 A.D. 416, 86 N.Y.S. 836
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 15, 1904
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 91 A.D. 416 (Hirshkind v. Mayer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hirshkind v. Mayer, 91 A.D. 416, 86 N.Y.S. 836 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1904).

Opinion

Per Curiam :

The order appealed from in this case changes the place of trial of the action from the county of Westchester to the county of New York. The motion for such a change was based upon the ground that the latter county was the proper one. As the plaintiff resides in the county where the venue is laid, the motion could not properly have been granted upon the ground assigned. It is true that in the moving papers allegations are made with the design of showing that the convenience of witnesses would be subserved by the change, but it has been frequently decided in' this department that [417]*417a change in the place of trial will not be ordered upon that ground alone, where the change desired is from a rural county to the county of New York. (Quinn v. Brooklyn Heights R. R. Co., 88 App. Div. 57.)

The order should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with costs.

All concurred.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with costs.

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

Related

Larocque v. Conhaim
45 Misc. 234 (New York Supreme Court, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
91 A.D. 416, 86 N.Y.S. 836, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hirshkind-v-mayer-nyappdiv-1904.