Ward v. National Car Rental

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ward v. National Car Rental

226 A.D.2d 449, 640 N.Y.S.2d 593, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3555

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

DecidedApril 8, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 226 A.D.2d 449 (Ward v. National Car Rental) 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

Ward v. National Car Rental, 226 A.D.2d 449, 640 N.Y.S.2d 593, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3555 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the [450]*450Supreme Court, Queens County (Lane, J.), dated January 18, 1995, which granted the defendants’ motion to transfer venue from Queens County to Suffolk County, and denied his cross motion to discontinue the action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants’ motion to change venue. CPLR 503 (a) provides, as a general rule, that "the place of trial shall be in the county in which one of the parties resided when [the action] was commenced”. Here, however, the record reveals that none of the parties resided in Queens County at the commencement of the action, and thus the plaintiff’s choice of venue was improper. Accordingly, the plaintiff forfeited his right to select the place of venue (see, Tomasulo v Berland, 217 AD2d 655; Kirschner v Cusa, 211 AD2d 665; Quach v Waldbaums, Inc., 202 AD2d 562). Miller, J. P., Joy, Hart and Krausman, 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, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the [450]*450Supreme Court, Queens County (Lane, J.), dated January 18, 1995, which granted the defendants’ motion to transfer venue from Queens County to Suffolk County, and denied his cross motion to discontinue the action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants’ motion to change venue. CPLR 503 (a) provides, as a general rule, that "the place of trial shall be in the county in which one of the parties resided when [the action] was commenced”. Here, however, the record reveals that none of the parties resided in Queens County at the commencement of the action, and thus the plaintiff’s choice of venue was improper. Accordingly, the plaintiff forfeited his right to select the place of venue (see, Tomasulo v Berland, 217 AD2d 655; Kirschner v Cusa, 211 AD2d 665; Quach v Waldbaums, Inc., 202 AD2d 562). Miller, J. P., Joy, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

226 A.D.2d 449, 640 N.Y.S.2d 593, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3555, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ward-v-national-car-rental-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack