Schoen v. Chase Manhattan Automotive Finance Corp.

274 A.D.2d 345, 711 N.Y.S.2d 15, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8244
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 27, 2000·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Madden, J.), entered March 25, 1999, which granted defendant Goldberg’s cross-motion to transfer venue to Nassau County, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and the cross-motion denied.

The vague and conclusory allegations offered in support of defendant Goldberg’s cross-motion were insufficient to warrant a change of venue. We note in this regard that, among other deficiencies, defendant’s submissions failed to identify a single non-party witness who has expressed any inconvenience in having to testify in New York County (compare, Lloyd v National Propane Corp., 271 AD2d 202). Nor did defendant indicate the home or work addresses of the various witnesses. Accordingly, Supreme Court erred in granting the cross mo[346] tion. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Williams, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.

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

Schoen v. Chase Manhattan Automotive Finance Corp., 274 A.D.2d 345, 711 N.Y.S.2d 15, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8244 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

274 A.D.2d 345 (Schoen v. Chase Manhattan Automotive Finance Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gersten v. Lemke
68 A.D.3d 681 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Morrison v. Lawler
290 A.D.2d 370 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)