Watertown Estates Corp. v. Griffin Roofing, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Watertown Estates Corp. v. Griffin Roofing, Inc.

18 A.D.2d 766, 235 N.Y.S.2d 193, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6598

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

DecidedDecember 6, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A.D.2d 766 (Watertown Estates Corp. v. Griffin Roofing, Inc.) 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

Watertown Estates Corp. v. Griffin Roofing, Inc., 18 A.D.2d 766, 235 N.Y.S.2d 193, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6598 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously with $25 costs and disbursements and motion granted, without costs. Memorandum: This is a transitory action which should be tried in Jefferson County where the cause of action arose. A majority of the witnesses reside in Jefferson County and their convenience will be best served by changing the place of trial| to that county where the action can be reached for trial at the next term of cojirt. The ends of justice will be promoted by the change and the refusal of Special Term to grant defendant’s motion was an improvident exercise of discretion. (Warner v. Heimerl Trucking Corp., 276 App. Div. 1052; Bernstein v. McKane, 3 A D 2d 764; Slavin v. Whispell, 5 A D 2d 296.) (Appeal from order ¡of Monroe Special Term denying defendant’s motion for a change of venue.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Halpern and Henry, JJ.

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

Order unanimously with $25 costs and disbursements and motion granted, without costs. Memorandum: This is a transitory action which should be tried in Jefferson County where the cause of action arose. A majority of the witnesses reside in Jefferson County and their convenience will be best served by changing the place of trial| to that county where the action can be reached for trial at the next term of cojirt. The ends of justice will be promoted by the change and the refusal of Special Term to grant defendant’s motion was an improvident exercise of discretion. (Warner v. Heimerl Trucking Corp., 276 App. Div. 1052; Bernstein v. McKane, 3 A D 2d 764; Slavin v. Whispell, 5 A D 2d 296.) (Appeal from order ¡of Monroe Special Term denying defendant’s motion for a change of venue.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Halpern and Henry, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.2d 766, 235 N.Y.S.2d 193, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watertown-estates-corp-v-griffin-roofing-inc-nyappdiv-1962.