From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bauer v. Facilities Development Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 23, 1994
210 A.D.2d 992 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

December 23, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Affronti, J.

Present — Green, J.P., Lawton, Wesley, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.


Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and motion granted. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying defendants' motions for change of venue. Subdivision (1) of section 12 of the Facilities Development Corporation Act (L 1968, ch 359, § 1, as amended; McKinney's Uncons Laws of N Y § 4412 [1]) provides, in pertinent part, that "[t]he venue of any action, suit or special proceeding brought against the corporation shall be laid in the county of Albany." To prevent the transfer of the action, plaintiffs were required to make a cross motion to retain venue in Monroe County for the convenience of material witnesses and the ends of justice (see, CPLR 510; Bruder v Pepsi Cola, 166 A.D.2d 243, 244; Pitegoff v Lucia, 97 A.D.2d 896; 7A Carmody-Wait 2d, N Y Prac § 48:58, at 168). The affidavits submitted in opposition to defendants' motions are insufficient to constitute a cross motion (see, Pitegoff v Lucia, supra; Braver v County of Nassau Off. of Admin. Servs., 67 Misc.2d 120, 121; 7A Carmody-Wait 2d, N Y Prac § 48:58, at 168). Those affidavits, moreover, fail to establish the existence of compelling circumstances that would justify a departure from the statutory directive (see, Kroupa v Facilities Dev. Corp., 157 A.D.2d 650; Seaboard Sur. Co. v Facilities Dev. Corp., 100 A.D.2d 787; see also, Zinker v Zinker, 185 A.D.2d 698).


Summaries of

Bauer v. Facilities Development Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 23, 1994
210 A.D.2d 992 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Bauer v. Facilities Development Corp.

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD C. BAUER, Respondent, v. FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION…

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

Date published: Dec 23, 1994

Citations

210 A.D.2d 992 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
621 N.Y.S.2d 815

Citing Cases

Vamvkaris v. City of New York

Accordingly, that branch of DiFazio's motion seeking to dismiss Verizon's claim against it, as it is premised…

S.K. v. S.K.

Defendant is further granted leave to renew her application for an award of appraisal fees at trial.…