Opinion
December, 1928.
Appeal from Supreme Court, Kings County.
Order denying defendant's motion for change of venue and order denying motion for reargument affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Lazansky, P.J., Young, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur; Seeger, J., dissents with the following memorandum:
The appeal is from an order denying a motion for a change of venue, and from an order denying a motion for reargument of such motion. The original motion papers present a convincing argument for a change of venue upon the ground of convenience of witnesses. The motion is to change the venue from a metropolitan county to a rural county, where a speedy trial can be had, and it should be granted for that reason. ( Mills v. Sparrow, 131 App. Div. 241; Archer v. McIlravy, 86 id. 512.) The change of venue is sought to the county where the accident happened and where the witnesses to the accident reside, and should be granted for that reason also. ( Jacobs v. Davis, 65 App. Div. 144.)