From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hartigan v. Kurian

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 15, 1996
224 A.D.2d 299 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

February 15, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.).


A motion to change venue on the ground of the convenience of witnesses is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court ( see, Pittman v. Maher, 202 A.D.2d 172, 176). The general statements of several nonparty post-operative treating physicians that it would be more convenient for them to testify in Westchester County, rather than Bronx County, are insufficient to warrant a change of venue ( see, Clark v. New Rochelle Hosp. Med. Ctr., 170 A.D.2d 271), especially in view of the long delay in making the motion.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Ellerin, Rubin and Kupferman, JJ.


Summaries of

Hartigan v. Kurian

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 15, 1996
224 A.D.2d 299 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Hartigan v. Kurian

Case Details

Full title:BARBARA HARTIGAN, Respondent, v. GEORGE KURIAN et al., Appellants, et al.…

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

Date published: Feb 15, 1996

Citations

224 A.D.2d 299 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
638 N.Y.S.2d 33

Citing Cases

Walton v. Mercy Coll.

See CPLR 504, 505. In a very recent case where the "Yonkers Police Department investigated the incident and…

Verizon N.Y., Inc. v. Stilsing Elec., Inc.

There can be no argument that a large preponderance of witnesses, both party and non-party, reside outside of…