Mermelstein v. Kalker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mermelstein v. Kalker

294 A.D.2d 413, 741 N.Y.S.2d 903, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4893

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

DecidedMay 13, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 294 A.D.2d 413 (Mermelstein v. Kalker) 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

Mermelstein v. Kalker, 294 A.D.2d 413, 741 N.Y.S.2d 903, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4893 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Santiago Texidor, Jr., and National Freight, Inc., appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (I. Aronin, J.), dated September 4, 2001, as denied their motion to change the venue of the action from Kings County to Orange County.

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

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendants’ motion to change venue based on the convenience of the material witnesses (see CPLR 510 [3]; O’Brien v Vassar Bros. Hosp., 207 AD2d 169). Altman, J.P., Smith, Krausman, McGinity and Cozier, 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, the defendants Santiago Texidor, Jr., and National Freight, Inc., appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (I. Aronin, J.), dated September 4, 2001, as denied their motion to change the venue of the action from Kings County to Orange County.

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

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendants’ motion to change venue based on the convenience of the material witnesses (see CPLR 510 [3]; O’Brien v Vassar Bros. Hosp., 207 AD2d 169). Altman, J.P., Smith, Krausman, McGinity and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 413, 741 N.Y.S.2d 903, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4893, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mermelstein-v-kalker-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack