Schaefer v. Schwartz

226 A.D.2d 619, 641 N.Y.S.2d 138, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4457
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 22, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 226 A.D.2d 619 (Schaefer v. Schwartz) 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
Schaefer v. Schwartz, 226 A.D.2d 619, 641 N.Y.S.2d 138, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4457 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to [620]*620recover damages for medical malpractice, the defendants separately appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Murphy, J.), entered July 5, 1995, which denied their motion to change venue from Bronx County to Nassau County.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We reject the defendants’ contention that the plaintiff failed to establish residency in Bronx County for the purpose of establishing venue in that county (see, CPLR 503 [a]). For venue purposes, a residence is where a party stays for some time with a bona fide intent to retain the place as a residence for some length of time and with some degree of permanency (see, Sibrizzi v Mount Tom Day School, 155 AD2d 337; Mandelbaum v Mandelbaum, 151 AD2d 727; Siegfried v Siegfried, 92 AD2d 916). The plaintiff’s affidavit and the annexed lease, rent receipts, and phone bills sufficiently establish all of the necessary indicia of residency. The defendants’ evidence to the contrary is unpersuasive, and their contention that the Supreme Court should have conducted a hearing on the matter is without merit.

In addition, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendants’ motion to change venue based on the convenience of material witnesses (see, CPLR 510 [3]; O’Brien v Vassar Bros. Hosp., 207 AD2d 169). Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Kelly v. Karsenty
117 A.D.3d 912 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Forbes v. Rubinovich
94 A.D.3d 809 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Deazle v. Miles
77 A.D.3d 660 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Ellis v. Wirshba
18 A.D.3d 805 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Bergman v. Fiel
12 A.D.3d 337 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Furth v. Elrac, Inc.
11 A.D.3d 509 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Gouvras v. McDonald's
301 A.D.2d 569 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Samuel v. Green
276 A.D.2d 687 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Daley v. Daley
257 A.D.2d 593 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Smart v. Schweizer
255 A.D.2d 856 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
226 A.D.2d 619, 641 N.Y.S.2d 138, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schaefer-v-schwartz-nyappdiv-1996.