Rookwood v. Alexiadis

182 A.D.2d 526, 583 N.Y.S.2d 917, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6193

This text of 182 A.D.2d 526 (Rookwood v. Alexiadis) 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
Rookwood v. Alexiadis, 182 A.D.2d 526, 583 N.Y.S.2d 917, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6193 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anita Florio, J.), entered June 20, 1991, which denied defendant’s motion for a change of venue, affirmed, without costs.

Defendant seeks a change of venue on the ground that Bronx County, where the action was commenced, is not a proper county because plaintiff did not reside there at the time the action was commenced, and also on the ground that convenience of material witnesses would be promoted.

[527]*527We agree with the IAS court that defendant failed to provide sufficient proof to controvert plaintiffs claim of a Bronx County residence. Defendant also failed to make the required showing to change venue on the ground of witnesses’ convenience (see, Andros v Roderick, 162 AD2d 813). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Asch and Smith, JJ.

Kupferman, J., dissents in a motion as follows: I would grant the motion for a change of venue.

The accident occurred in Queens. The plaintiffs driver’s license at that time listed an address in Mamaroneck and when the plaintiff went to a physician, the physician’s record also listed Mamaroneck. The plaintiffs employer, the New York City Transit Authority, lists an address in Queens. When the plaintiff verified his complaint, he alleged he was a resident of Queens. However, the summons, which was prepared at a later date than the complaint, lists an address in the Bronx.

We have too often allowed the ploy of alleging jurisdiction in the Bronx in negligence matters.

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

Related

Andros v. Roderick
162 A.D.2d 813 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
182 A.D.2d 526, 583 N.Y.S.2d 917, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rookwood-v-alexiadis-nyappdiv-1992.