Raynor v. HK Systems, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Raynor v. HK Systems, Inc.

30 A.D.3d 226, 815 N.Y.S.2d 825

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

DecidedJune 13, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 30 A.D.3d 226 (Raynor v. HK Systems, Inc.) 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

Raynor v. HK Systems, Inc., 30 A.D.3d 226, 815 N.Y.S.2d 825 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A.D.3d 226, 815 N.Y.S.2d 825, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raynor-v-hk-systems-inc-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack