Tripodi v. Wien

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tripodi v. Wien

15 A.D.2d 744, 224 N.Y.S.2d 196, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11662

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

DecidedFebruary 6, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 15 A.D.2d 744 (Tripodi v. Wien) 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

Tripodi v. Wien, 15 A.D.2d 744, 224 N.Y.S.2d 196, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11662 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

The action having been commenced in Nassau County, where none of the parties resided, the motion of the defendants for a change of venue to Bronx County, where defendants reside, should have been granted. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 182; Reed v. Ross, 260 App. Div. 596.) Although deemed moot by Special Term by reason of the order appealed from we note that plaintiff’s cross motion for a change of venue on the ground of the convenience of witnesses is unsupported by any factual statement in the affidavits submitted in support thereof, which were apparently prepared in support of a motion for a temporary injunction and have no bearing on the relief sought by way of cross motion. Settle order on notice. Concur — McNally, J. P., Stevens, Eager, Steuer and Bastow, JJ.

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

The action having been commenced in Nassau County, where none of the parties resided, the motion of the defendants for a change of venue to Bronx County, where defendants reside, should have been granted. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 182; Reed v. Ross, 260 App. Div. 596.) Although deemed moot by Special Term by reason of the order appealed from we note that plaintiff’s cross motion for a change of venue on the ground of the convenience of witnesses is unsupported by any factual statement in the affidavits submitted in support thereof, which were apparently prepared in support of a motion for a temporary injunction and have no bearing on the relief sought by way of cross motion. Settle order on notice. Concur — McNally, J. P., Stevens, Eager, Steuer and Bastow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 A.D.2d 744, 224 N.Y.S.2d 196, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11662, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tripodi-v-wien-nyappdiv-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack