From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Small v. Chrysler Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 5, 2001
288 A.D.2d 208 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Submitted October 1, 2001.

November 5, 2001.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries and wrongful death, the defendants Michelin Corporation and Michelin North America, Inc., f/k/a Michelin Tire Corp., appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schmidt, J.), dated July 31, 2000, which denied the motion of the defendant DaimlerChrysler Corporation, in which the defendants Michelin Corporation and Michelin North America, Inc., f/k/a Michelin Tire Corp., joined, pursuant to CPLR 510(3) to change the venue of the action from Kings County to Nassau County.

Goodwin Procter, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Glenn S. Kerner and Christopher J. Garvey of counsel), for appellants.

Pontisakos Rossi, P.C., Roslyn, N.Y. (Michael R. Rossi and Mark J. Rayo, P.C. [Louis A. Badolato] of counsel), for respondent.

Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the motion of the defendant DaimlerChrysler Corporation, in which the appellants joined, to change the venue of the action from Kings County to Nassau County based upon "the convenience of material witnesses and the ends of justice" (CPLR 510). The motion papers failed to sufficiently demonstrate that the nonparty witnesses would be inconvenienced if venue were not changed (see, Blumberg v. Salem Truck Leasing, 276 A.D.2d 577; Mallory v. Long Is. R. R., 245 A.D.2d 493; Murphy v. Long Is. R. R., 239 A.D.2d 472; O'Brien v. Vassar Bros. Hosp., 207 A.D.2d 169).

In light of this determination, we need not reach the respondent's remaining contention.

RITTER, J.P., FLORIO, FEUERSTEIN and CRANE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Small v. Chrysler Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 5, 2001
288 A.D.2d 208 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Small v. Chrysler Corp.

Case Details

Full title:MARIETTA SMALL, ETC., RESPONDENT, v. CHRYSLER CORPORATION, ET AL.…

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

Date published: Nov 5, 2001

Citations

288 A.D.2d 208 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
734 N.Y.S.2d 451

Citing Cases

Willie Milom v. Marble Hall

Accordingly, the plaintiff's choice of venue was proper ( see Hamilton v Corona Ready Mix, Inc., 21 AD3d 448,…

Jarrett v. Berner

The defendants did not establish their entitlement to a change of venue based on the convenience of material,…