From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Austin v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 14, 2002
294 A.D.2d 182 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

1061N

May 14, 2002.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marilyn Shafer, J.), entered April 6, 2001, which, in an action for personal injuries arising out of a car accident in Suffolk County, granted defendant-respondent car manufacturer's motion to change venue from New York County to Suffolk County, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Stephen C. Glasser, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Herbert Rubin John J. Leonard, for defendants-respondents.

Before: Andrias, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Rubin, Friedman, JJ.


The venue of this action should be changed to Suffolk County, where the liability witnesses either work or live, many of whom, namely, police, fire and ambulance personnel who responded to the accident, have submitted affidavits stating that they would be inconvenienced by having to testify in New York County (see, Lloyd v. National Propane Corp., 271 A.D.2d 202; Carroll v. American Honda Motor Co., 196 A.D.2d 757). No basis exists for rejecting defendant's assertion that these witnesses will provide details concerning the accident scene necessary to lay a foundation for the testimony of its accident reconstruction and product liability experts. That several eyewitnesses have submitted affidavits stating that they would not be inconvenienced by a trial in New York County does not warrant denial of the motion. Other things being equal, a transitory action should be tried where the cause of action arose (see,Risoli v. Long Is. Lighting Co., 138 A.D.2d 316, 318).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Austin v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 14, 2002
294 A.D.2d 182 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Austin v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.

Case Details

Full title:NATASHA AUSTIN, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. DAIMLERCHRYSLER…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 14, 2002

Citations

294 A.D.2d 182 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
741 N.Y.S.2d 685

Citing Cases

Dlugaski v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.

And by placing venue in a county that would inconvenience such witnesses would not promote the “fair and…