Opinion
665.1 CA 18–01583
08-22-2019
AMERICAN TAX FUNDING, LLC, Plaintiff–appellant, v. DRUCKMAN LAW GROUP PLLC, Defendant–respondent.
CAMARDO LAW FIRM, P.C., AUBURN (JUSTIN T. HUFFMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT. DRUCKMAN LAW GROUP PLLC, WESTBURY (MARIA SIDERIS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–RESPONDENT.
CAMARDO LAW FIRM, P.C., AUBURN (JUSTIN T. HUFFMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT.
DRUCKMAN LAW GROUP PLLC, WESTBURY (MARIA SIDERIS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, DEJOSEPH, TROUTMAN, AND WINSLOW, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Plaintiff appeals from an order granting defendant's motion for a change of venue from Monroe County to Nassau County. Contrary to plaintiff's contention, Supreme Court properly determined that defendant's motion was timely and in compliance with the procedure set forth in CPLR 511. We agree with defendant that the court's prior order granting it leave to serve a late answer pursuant to CPLR 3012(d) effectively extended the time for it to serve its written demand for a change of venue (see North County Communications Corp. v. Verizon N.Y., 196 Misc.2d 149, 152–153, 762 N.Y.S.2d 238 [Sup. Ct., Albany County 2003] ; see also Valley Psychological, P.C. v. Government Empls. Ins. Co., 95 A.D.3d 1546, 1547, 944 N.Y.S.2d 785 [3d Dept. 2012] ). Defendant timely served its written demand on May 9, 2017, "before the answer [was] served" on May 15, 2017 ( CPLR 511[a] ). In its subsequent motion for a change of venue (see CPLR 511[b] ), defendant established that Nassau County is, and Monroe County is not, a proper venue for trial of the action, and the court therefore properly granted the motion as a matter of right (see Agway, Inc. v. Kervin, 188 A.D.2d 1076, 1077, 592 N.Y.S.2d 183 [4th Dept. 1992] ; see generally Siegel N.Y. Prac. § 123 at 223 [5th ed. 2011]).
In light of our determination, plaintiff's remaining contentions are academic.