Rosario v. St. John's Riverside Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rosario v. St. John's Riverside Hospital

11 A.D.3d 351, 784 N.Y.S.2d 485, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12377

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 21, 2004·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Janice L. Bowman, J.), entered March 18, 2004, which, in a medical malpractice action, denied defendant-appellant’s motion for a change of venue to Westchester County, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While we accept that the medical practices of appellant’s witnesses are such as to require them to travel by car on short notice to medical facilities throughout Westchester County, there is no dispute that the courthouse in the Bronx is, in road miles, closer to Yonkers, where all three of the proposed witnesses either maintain an office or otherwise appear to base their prac[352] tices, than Yonkers is to the courthouse in White Plains. We are not persuaded that the convenience of these witnesses would be served by a trial in White Plains (see Kurnitz v New Rochelle Hosp. Med. Ctr., 166 AD2d 390 [1990]; Scott v Ecker Mfg. Corp., 161 AD2d 347 [1990]). Concur—Buckley, P.J., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Marlow and Catterson, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Janice L. Bowman, J.), entered March 18, 2004, which, in a medical malpractice action, denied defendant-appellant’s motion for a change of venue to Westchester County, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While we accept that the medical practices of appellant’s witnesses are such as to require them to travel by car on short notice to medical facilities throughout Westchester County, there is no dispute that the courthouse in the Bronx is, in road miles, closer to Yonkers, where all three of the proposed witnesses either maintain an office or otherwise appear to base their prac[352] tices, than Yonkers is to the courthouse in White Plains. We are not persuaded that the convenience of these witnesses would be served by a trial in White Plains (see Kurnitz v New Rochelle Hosp. Med. Ctr., 166 AD2d 390 [1990]; Scott v Ecker Mfg. Corp., 161 AD2d 347 [1990]). Concur—Buckley, P.J., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Marlow and Catterson, JJ.

Rosario v. St. John's Riverside Hospital, 11 A.D.3d 351, 784 N.Y.S.2d 485, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12377 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

11 A.D.3d 351 (Rosario v. St. John's Riverside Hospital) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related