Voutsas v. Chrysler Motor Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Voutsas v. Chrysler Motor Corp.

208 A.D.2d 919, 618 N.Y.S.2d 23, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10707

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

DecidedOctober 31, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 208 A.D.2d 919 (Voutsas v. Chrysler Motor 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

Voutsas v. Chrysler Motor Corp., 208 A.D.2d 919, 618 N.Y.S.2d 23, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10707 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Durante, J.), dated June 17, 1993, which granted the defendants’ motion to change venue.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We find that, under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by changing the venue of the action to Suffolk County. The cause of action arose in that county, and the convenience of identified, nonparty witnesses would be promoted by the change of venue (see, Thomas v Small, 121 AD2d 622; McDonald v Southampton Hosp., 133 AD2d 814; Jansen v Bernhang, 149 AD2d 468, 469; Bolling v Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth., 205 AD2d 724). Thompson, J. P., Miller, O’Brien, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Durante, J.), dated June 17, 1993, which granted the defendants’ motion to change venue.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We find that, under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by changing the venue of the action to Suffolk County. The cause of action arose in that county, and the convenience of identified, nonparty witnesses would be promoted by the change of venue (see, Thomas v Small, 121 AD2d 622; McDonald v Southampton Hosp., 133 AD2d 814; Jansen v Bernhang, 149 AD2d 468, 469; Bolling v Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth., 205 AD2d 724). Thompson, J. P., Miller, O’Brien, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 A.D.2d 919, 618 N.Y.S.2d 23, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10707, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/voutsas-v-chrysler-motor-corp-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack