Slade v. Amerada Hess Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Slade v. Amerada Hess Corp.

270 A.D.2d 131, 706 N.Y.S.2d 309, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2990

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

DecidedMarch 21, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 270 A.D.2d 131 (Slade v. Amerada Hess Corp.) 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

Slade v. Amerada Hess Corp., 270 A.D.2d 131, 706 N.Y.S.2d 309, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2990 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered on or about April 28, 1999, which granted defendants’ motion to change venue from New York County to Nassau County pursuant to CPLR 510 (3), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this action to recover for personal injuries allegedly sustained when plaintiff tripped and fell on defendants’ [132]*132premises located in Nassau County, the motion court properly granted defendants’ motion to change venue. Defendants established that a prospective nonparty witness to plaintiffs accident, who has indicated a willingness to give testimony material to the determination of liability, would be seriously inconvenienced if he had to travel to New York County to testify and that Nassau County, which is closer to his place of employment, would be a more convenient venue for him (see, CPLR 510 [3]; Heinemann v Grunfeld, 224 AD2d 204). Concur— Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered on or about April 28, 1999, which granted defendants’ motion to change venue from New York County to Nassau County pursuant to CPLR 510 (3), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this action to recover for personal injuries allegedly sustained when plaintiff tripped and fell on defendants’ [132]*132premises located in Nassau County, the motion court properly granted defendants’ motion to change venue. Defendants established that a prospective nonparty witness to plaintiffs accident, who has indicated a willingness to give testimony material to the determination of liability, would be seriously inconvenienced if he had to travel to New York County to testify and that Nassau County, which is closer to his place of employment, would be a more convenient venue for him (see, CPLR 510 [3]; Heinemann v Grunfeld, 224 AD2d 204). Concur— Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D.2d 131, 706 N.Y.S.2d 309, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2990, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/slade-v-amerada-hess-corp-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack