Martin-Trigona v. Stewart

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Martin-Trigona v. Stewart

233 A.D.2d 237, 650 N.Y.S.2d 531

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 21, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 233 A.D.2d 237 (Martin-Trigona v. Stewart) 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

Martin-Trigona v. Stewart, 233 A.D.2d 237, 650 N.Y.S.2d 531 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Norman Ryp, J.), entered on or about January 26, 1996, which granted the Law Guardian’s motion for a change of venue of these consolidated actions seeking visitation and custody to Ulster County, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

[238]*238The requested change of venue is warranted because the records and witnesses necessary to a determination of the best interests of the children are located in Ulster County, where the children have resided with their mother since 1991, and also because of the prior actions already pending in Ulster County involving the same issues and parties (Kramer, Levin, Nessen, Kamin & Frankel v International 800 Telecom Corp., 190 AD2d 538). Appellants’ remaining arguments are without merit. Concur—Wallach, J. P., Ross, Nardelli, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Norman Ryp, J.), entered on or about January 26, 1996, which granted the Law Guardian’s motion for a change of venue of these consolidated actions seeking visitation and custody to Ulster County, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

[238]*238The requested change of venue is warranted because the records and witnesses necessary to a determination of the best interests of the children are located in Ulster County, where the children have resided with their mother since 1991, and also because of the prior actions already pending in Ulster County involving the same issues and parties (Kramer, Levin, Nessen, Kamin & Frankel v International 800 Telecom Corp., 190 AD2d 538). Appellants’ remaining arguments are without merit. Concur—Wallach, J. P., Ross, Nardelli, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

233 A.D.2d 237, 650 N.Y.S.2d 531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-trigona-v-stewart-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack