Schwartz v. Haight

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schwartz v. Haight

259 A.D. 911, 20 N.Y.S.2d 164, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7250

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

DecidedMay 14, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 259 A.D. 911 (Schwartz v. Haight) 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

Schwartz v. Haight, 259 A.D. 911, 20 N.Y.S.2d 164, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7250 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Action for damages for personal injuries suffered by the plaintiff while a passenger in a ear which collided with an automobile operated by the defendant on a road in Dutchess county. Order denying defendant’s motion to change the venue from Kangs [912]*912county to Dutchess county to subserve the convenience of witnesses reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, without costs. The defendant’s showing of convenience of witnesses required the granting of this motion even in the face of concessions proffered by the plaintiff in respect of the witnesses Warren, Stoneham and Yaecarine. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

Action for damages for personal injuries suffered by the plaintiff while a passenger in a ear which collided with an automobile operated by the defendant on a road in Dutchess county. Order denying defendant’s motion to change the venue from Kangs [912]*912county to Dutchess county to subserve the convenience of witnesses reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, without costs. The defendant’s showing of convenience of witnesses required the granting of this motion even in the face of concessions proffered by the plaintiff in respect of the witnesses Warren, Stoneham and Yaecarine. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D. 911, 20 N.Y.S.2d 164, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7250, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schwartz-v-haight-nyappdiv-1940.