From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

LaMantia v. North Shore University Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 9, 1999
259 A.D.2d 294 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

March 9, 1999

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Friedman, J.).


As a general matter, strict compliance with the time requirements set forth in CPLR 511 (a) and (b) is required when defendants allege that venue was improperly placed ( see, Pittman v. Maher, 202 A.D.2d 172; Rosenthal v. Bologna, 211 A.D.2d 436). Nevertheless, noncompliance should be excused where it was caused by "plaintiff's willful omissions and misleading statements" so long as defendant moves promptly after ascertaining plaintiff's residence ( Philogene v. Fuller Auto Leasing, 167 A.D.2d 178, 179). Here, in light of the repeated erroneous assertion in papers submitted by plaintiff that she resided in Bronx County, and defendant's prompt motion seeking a change in venue upon learning that her residence was actually in Westchester County, we find that defendant's motion was timely made. Upon consideration of that motion, which seeks transfer of venue to Nassau County, where the cause of action accrued, we find that it should be granted.

Concur — Ellerin, P. J., Sullivan, Williams and Wallach, JJ.


Summaries of

LaMantia v. North Shore University Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 9, 1999
259 A.D.2d 294 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

LaMantia v. North Shore University Hospital

Case Details

Full title:BETTY LaMANTIA, Respondent, v. NORTH SHORE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL, Doing…

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

Date published: Mar 9, 1999

Citations

259 A.D.2d 294 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
686 N.Y.S.2d 416

Citing Cases

Kastner v. MacLean

Defendants must strictly comply with these time requirements. Collins v. Greenwood Mgt. Corp., 25 A.D.3d 447,…

Clark v. Archdiocese of N.Y.

This deadline requires strict compliance. Collins v. Greenwood Mgt. Corp., 25 A.D.3d 447, 449 (1st Dep't…