From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cramer v. Cohn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 27, 1939
257 App. Div. 1098 (N.Y. App. Div. 1939)

Opinion

September 27, 1939.

Present — Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.


Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Memorandum: We disregard the convenience of six of defendants' proposed witnesses who, according to defendants' affidavits filed in support of the motion, will testify as experts. ( Seafir v. Shutts, 190 App. Div. 518; Quinn v. Brooklyn Heights R.R. Co., 88 id. 57, 59.) The defendants have failed to establish that the convenience of a greater number of material witnesses and the ends of justice will be promoted by the change of venue sought. All concur. (The order denies a motion for change of venue.


Summaries of

Cramer v. Cohn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 27, 1939
257 App. Div. 1098 (N.Y. App. Div. 1939)
Case details for

Cramer v. Cohn

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM CRAMER and AARON WEINSTEIN, Respondents, v. ABRAHAM N. COHN and…

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

Date published: Sep 27, 1939

Citations

257 App. Div. 1098 (N.Y. App. Div. 1939)

Citing Cases

Saphir v. Kruse

e is no affidavit of merits ( Iron Nat. Bank of Plattsburgh v. Dolge, 46 App. Div. 327); in that they fail to…

Poolet v. State of N.Y

(See Delair v. Southworth Tractor Mach. Co., 142 N.Y.S.2d 449, 450.) As stated in Efco Prods. v. Long Is.…