From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schaefer v. Schwartz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 22, 1996
226 A.D.2d 619 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

April 22, 1996

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


Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We reject the defendants' contention that the plaintiff failed to establish residency in Bronx County for the purpose of establishing venue in that county ( see, CPLR 503 [a]). For venue purposes, a residence is where a party stays for some time with a bona fide intent to retain the place as a residence for some length of time and with some degree of permanency ( see, Sibrizzi v. Mount Tom Day School, 155 A.D.2d 337; Mandelbaum v Mandelbaum, 151 A.D.2d 727; Siegfried v. Siegfried, 92 A.D.2d 916). The plaintiff's affidavit and the annexed lease, rent receipts, and phone bills sufficiently establish all of the necessary indicia of residency. The defendants' evidence to the contrary is unpersuasive, and their contention that the Supreme Court should have conducted a hearing on the matter is without merit.

In addition, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendants' motion to change venue based on the convenience of material witnesses ( see, CPLR 510; O'Brien v. Vassar Bros. Hosp., 207 A.D.2d 169). Mangano, P.J., Thompson, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Schaefer v. Schwartz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 22, 1996
226 A.D.2d 619 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Schaefer v. Schwartz

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL E. SCHAEFER, Respondent, v. BARRY F. SCHWARTZ et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Apr 22, 1996

Citations

226 A.D.2d 619 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
641 N.Y.S.2d 138

Citing Cases

Smart v. Schweizer

Finally, Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying plaintiffs' cross motion to…

Samuel v. Green

However, to consider a place as a residence for venue purposes, one must "stay there for some time and have…