From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cenziper v. Gross

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 22, 1991
175 A.D.2d 226 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

July 22, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Robbins, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted and the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Kings 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 (see, CPLR 511 [d]).

We agree with the defendant's contention that the court erroneously denied his motion to change the venue of the instant action from Kings County to Nassau County. Pursuant to CPLR 503 (a) the venue of an action is proper in the county in which any of the parties resided at the time of commencement (see, e.g., Naples v Daubert Chem. Co., 93 A.D.2d 745). The plaintiff is a resident of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and thus the proper venue rests in either of the counties in which the respective defendants reside. The defendant Grace Luggage Co., Inc., resides in New York County, the county designated as its principal location in its certificate of incorporation. It is well settled that the sole residence of a domestic corporation for venue purposes is the county designated in its certificate of incorporation (Saal v Claridge Hotel Casino, 152 A.D.2d 631; Papadakis v Command Bus Co., 91 A.D.2d 657; Bailey v New York Racing Assn., 90 A.D.2d 710; United Credit Corp. v Le Roy Adventures, 61 A.D.2d 742). Thus, New York County, rather than Kings County, would have been an appropriate venue for the plaintiff to commence this action against this defendant. The defendant Gross resides in Nassau County. Thus, it is clear that the plaintiff's choice of venue was improper and he has accordingly forfeited his right to select the venue of this action (Saal v Claridge Hotel Casino, supra; Papadakis v Command Bus Co., supra). Accordingly, the motion of the defendant Gross to change the venue of this action to Nassau County, a proper venue, is granted. Mangano, P.J., Bracken, Lawrence and Miller, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Cenziper v. Gross

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 22, 1991
175 A.D.2d 226 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Cenziper v. Gross

Case Details

Full title:SANDOR CENZIPER, Respondent, v. BERNARD GROSS, Appellant, et al., Defendant

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

Date published: Jul 22, 1991

Citations

175 A.D.2d 226 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
572 N.Y.S.2d 699

Citing Cases

Tomasulo v. Berland

Inasmuch as none of the parties resided in Kings County at the time of the commencement of the action…

TENER CONSULTING SERV. v. FSA MAIN ST., LLC

On a motion to change venue pursuant to CPLR 510 and 511, it is defendant's burden to establish that…