From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bolling v. Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 27, 1994
205 A.D.2d 724 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

June 27, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Zelman, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law and the facts, with costs, and the defendants' motion to transfer venue from Queens County to Nassau County is granted; and it is further,

Ordered that the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Queens County, is directed to deliver to the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, all papers filed in the action and certified copies of all minutes and entries (CPLR 511 [d]).

We find that the court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the defendants' motion to transfer venue from Queens to Nassau County. Since the principal office of the defendant Metropolitan Suburban Bus Authority is located in Garden City, Nassau County was a proper place of venue (see, CPLR 505 [a]), and the plaintiff's opposition papers failed to establish that the convenience of witnesses required that venue should be retained in Queens County.

Although the plaintiff supplied the names and addresses of alleged potential witnesses, she failed to indicate that such witnesses had been contacted and were willing to testify on her behalf, to specify the substance of each witness's testimony, and to show that such testimony would be necessary and material upon the trial of the action (see, Bell v. Cusano, 197 A.D.2d 382; Moye v. H.L. Green, Inc., 159 A.D.2d 242; Greene v. Hillcrest Gen. Hosp., 130 A.D.2d 621). The case of Weissmandl v. Murray Walter, Inc. ( 147 A.D.2d 474), relied upon by the Supreme Court, is clearly distinguishable since, in that case, the plaintiff submitted sworn affidavits from seven eyewitnesses and her treating physician setting forth the necessary information to show that they would be inconvenienced by a change of venue from Kings County to Rockland County. Mangano, P.J., Balletta, O'Brien and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Bolling v. Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 27, 1994
205 A.D.2d 724 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Bolling v. Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth

Case Details

Full title:DIANE BOLLING, Respondent, v. METROPOLITAN SUBURBAN BUS AUTHORITY et al.…

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

Date published: Jun 27, 1994

Citations

205 A.D.2d 724 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
614 N.Y.S.2d 35

Citing Cases

Weingarten v. B.O.E. of City Sch. Dist. of N.Y

In any event, since defendants have the burden of showing that plaintiffs' chosen venue is improper or is…

Weingarten v. Board of Educ. of the City School

In any event, since the defendant has the burden of showing that plaintiff's chosen venue is improper or is…