From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Baccigalupi v. Michel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 25, 1991
170 A.D.2d 635 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

February 25, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The basis of the venue of this action is the plaintiff's county of residence. Venue was properly placed in Kings County in the first instance (see, CPLR 503 [a]; Torriero v Austin Truck Rental, 143 A.D.2d 595, 596). Consequently, the defendants may not change venue as a matter of right (see, CPLR 510). Thompson, J.P., Kunzeman, Eiber, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Baccigalupi v. Michel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 25, 1991
170 A.D.2d 635 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Baccigalupi v. Michel

Case Details

Full title:MICHELLE M. BACCIGALUPI, Respondent, v. ROBERT MICHEL et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Feb 25, 1991

Citations

170 A.D.2d 635 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
567 N.Y.S.2d 60

Citing Cases

Garced v. Clinton Arms Associates

The majority's disposition is at odds with settled precedent, which dictates that "[w]here resolution of . .…