Shelton v. Cable Express, Inc.

275 A.D.2d 1017, 713 N.Y.S.2d 603, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9625
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 29, 2000·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground of forum non conveniens (see, CPLR 327 [a]). Contrary to defendants’ contention, the occurrence of the motor vehicle accident in New York is not the only connection with this State. An eyewitness is a New York resident and, as a result of the investigation of the New York State Police, defendant William K. Glosser was cited for following too closely in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1129 (a) (cf., Dales v Tiessen, 231 AD2d 920; Singh v Zuidema, 221 AD2d 1020). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Chautauqua County, Gerace, J. — Dismiss Pleading.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Wisner, Scudder and Lawton, JJ.

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

Shelton v. Cable Express, Inc., 275 A.D.2d 1017, 713 N.Y.S.2d 603, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9625 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

275 A.D.2d 1017 (Shelton v. Cable Express, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bodea v. TransNat Express, Inc.
286 A.D.2d 5 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)