Palma v. Burgos

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Palma v. Burgos

2017 NY Slip Op 738, 147 A.D.3d 426, 45 N.Y.S.3d 798

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

DecidedFebruary 2, 2017

Docket2988N 304022/15

StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 738 (Palma v. Burgos) 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

Palma v. Burgos, 2017 NY Slip Op 738, 147 A.D.3d 426, 45 N.Y.S.3d 798 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

*427 Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kenneth L. Thompson, Jr., J.), entered March 16, 2016, which denied defendant’s motion to change venue from Bronx County to Rockland County pursuant to CPLR 510 (2), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s denial of defendant’s motion was a provident exercise of discretion (see Midonick v Peppertree Hill Dev. Corp., 49 AD2d 721 [1st Dept 1975]). Plaintiff is a member of the New York City Council and is Secretary of the Bronx Democratic Committee. These positions held by plaintiff, however, do not justify an inference that a fair trial cannot be held in Bronx County. As in Midonick, the subject motion was based merely upon defendant’s belief that an impartial trial could not be held “without any showing of facts and circumstances demonstrating that the belief was well-founded” (id. at 722). Defendant’s reliance on cases involving motions for a change of venue where judges were involved with a case in the jurisdiction where he or she presided (see e.g. Rothwax v Spicehandler, 161 AD2d 184 [1st Dept 1990]; Arkwright v Steinbugler, 283 App Div 397 [2d Dept 1954]), is misplaced. Plaintiff is not a judge in Bronx County, nor is she closely related to one.

Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Acosta, Moskowitz, Kapnick and Kahn, JJ.

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

*427 Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kenneth L. Thompson, Jr., J.), entered March 16, 2016, which denied defendant’s motion to change venue from Bronx County to Rockland County pursuant to CPLR 510 (2), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s denial of defendant’s motion was a provident exercise of discretion (see Midonick v Peppertree Hill Dev. Corp., 49 AD2d 721 [1st Dept 1975]). Plaintiff is a member of the New York City Council and is Secretary of the Bronx Democratic Committee. These positions held by plaintiff, however, do not justify an inference that a fair trial cannot be held in Bronx County. As in Midonick, the subject motion was based merely upon defendant’s belief that an impartial trial could not be held “without any showing of facts and circumstances demonstrating that the belief was well-founded” (id. at 722). Defendant’s reliance on cases involving motions for a change of venue where judges were involved with a case in the jurisdiction where he or she presided (see e.g. Rothwax v Spicehandler, 161 AD2d 184 [1st Dept 1990]; Arkwright v Steinbugler, 283 App Div 397 [2d Dept 1954]), is misplaced. Plaintiff is not a judge in Bronx County, nor is she closely related to one.

Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Acosta, Moskowitz, Kapnick and Kahn, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 738, 147 A.D.3d 426, 45 N.Y.S.3d 798, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palma-v-burgos-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack