Bikel v. Bakertown Realty Grp., Inc.
| Citation | 69 N.Y.S.3d 876,157 A.D.3d 924 |
| Decision Date | 31 January 2018 |
| Docket Number | 2016–01227,Index No. 14692/14 |
| Parties | David BIKEL, appellant, v. BAKERTOWN REALTY GROUP, INC., respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
157 A.D.3d 924
69 N.Y.S.3d 876
David BIKEL, appellant,
v.
BAKERTOWN REALTY GROUP, INC., respondent.
2016–01227
Index No. 14692/14
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Argued—October 23, 2017
January 31, 2018
Subin Associates, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Robert J. Eisen, Gregory T. Cerchione, and Michael H. Zhu of counsel), for appellant.
Baxter Smith & Shapiro, P.C., White Plains, N.Y. (Sim R. Shapiro of counsel), for respondent.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Velasquez, J.), dated September 30, 2015, which granted the defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 510 to change the venue of the action from Kings County to Orange County.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, with costs, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for a hearing in accordance herewith, and thereafter, a new determination of the defendant's motion.
On June 1, 2014, the plaintiff allegedly was injured when he fell off a ladder on the defendant's property in Monroe, Orange County. On October 15, 2014, he commenced this action in the Supreme Court, Kings County, to recover damages for personal injuries, stating, as to venue, that he was a resident of Kings County. In conjunction with its answer to the complaint, the defendant served a demand to change venue to Orange County. Thereafter, the defendant timely moved pursuant to CPLR 510(1) and (3) to change venue to Orange County, arguing that the plaintiff did not reside in Kings County, and that the convenience of material witnesses warranted the change of venue. In the order appealed from, the Supreme Court granted the defendant's motion, finding that pursuant to CPLR 510(3), the convenience of material witnesses warranted a change of venue to Orange County.
CPLR 510(3) provides that, upon motion, the court may change the venue of an action where "the convenience of material witnesses and the ends of justice will be promoted by the change." A party moving to change venue pursuant to CPLR 510(3) must provide information about the prospective witnesses, including, but not limited to, their names and addresses, disclose the facts about which the proposed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Demirovic v. Performance Food Grp., Inc.
...of Locicero's residency, and thereafter, made a new determination of the defendants' motions (see Bikel v. Bakertown Realty Group, Inc., 157 A.D.3d 924, 926, 69 N.Y.S.3d 876 ; Patton v. Malychev, 132 A.D.3d at 830–831, 18 N.Y.S.3d 674 ; Tiangco v. Andrickson, 116 A.D.3d at 764, 982 N.Y.S.2d......
-
Coluck Inc. v. Sem Sec. Sys., Inc.
...999 N.Y.S.2d 747 ). Here, the defendant's submissions satisfied none of these criteria (see Bikel v. Bakertown Realty Group, Inc., 157 A.D.3d 924, 925, 69 N.Y.S.3d 876 ). Accordingly, that branch of the defendant's motion which was, in effect, pursuant to CPLR 510(3) to change venue should ......
-
Guinnip v. Maresca
...some degree of permanency. See Ellis v. Wirshba , 18 AD3d 805, 796 N.Y.S.2d 388 (2d Dept. 2005) ; Bikel v. Bakertown Realty Group, Inc. , 157 AD3d 924, 69 N.Y.S.3d 876 (2d Dept. 2018). Where venue is properly designated based upon a party's residence, a discretionary change of venue may be ......
-
In re Aaliyah J.
...aunt. On March 8, 2017, the mother gave birth to Aaliyah J. In a petition dated March 10, 2017, ACS alleged that the mother derivatively 69 N.Y.S.3d 876abused Aaliyah based on the earlier injuries to Kylee. At a hearing pursuant to Family Court Act § 1027, the mother consented to the remova......