Moors v. Craig

205 A.D. 897
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 15, 1923·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Order affirmed, with ten dollars posts and disbursements. An undisputed fact in this case is that of the removal of the relator. That occurred in New York county, but no issue can possibly be presented on that point. In our opinion, “ the material facts,” as alleged in the petition, “ took place,” within the meaning of section 1334 of the Civil Practice Act, in the county of Queens. That was the county of the relator’s office and in said office the alleged dereliction of failing to inform the relator’s superior officer of the claimed or so-called investigation by the grand jury is said to have occurred. We, therefore, think the order refusing to change the place of hearing of the motion from Queens county to New York county was correct. Kelly, P. J., Jaycox, Kelby, Young and Kapper, JJ., concur.

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

Moors v. Craig, 205 A.D. 897 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1923).

205 A.D. 897 (Moors v. Craig) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Crimmins v. Dennison
12 Misc. 3d 725 (New York Supreme Court, 2006)
Hawkins v. Coughlin
132 Misc. 2d 45 (New York Supreme Court, 1986)
Caparco v. Kaplan
36 Misc. 2d 653 (New York Supreme Court, 1962)
Browne v. New York State Board of Parole
25 Misc. 2d 1050 (New York Supreme Court, 1960)
Daley v. Board of Estimate
258 A.D. 165 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1939)
Rosenberg v. Board of Estimate
170 Misc. 359 (New York Supreme Court, 1938)