Raynor v. HK Systems, Inc.
30 A.D.3d 226, 815 N.Y.S.2d 825
Opinion
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Jane Goodman, J.), entered January 31, 2006, which denied defendant’s motion to change venue from New York County to Dutchess County, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The motion was properly denied for failure to demonstrate the materiality of the anticipated testimony of the witnesses on whose convenience the motion is based (see Cardona v Aggressive Heating, 180 AD2d 572, 572 [1992]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Andrias, Nardelli, Gonzalez and Malone, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Raynor v. HK Systems, Inc., 30 A.D.3d 226, 815 N.Y.S.2d 825 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).
30 A.D.3d 226 (Raynor v. HK Systems, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Cardon v. Aggressive Heating Inc.
180 A.D.2d 572 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)