Opinion
12618N Index No. 154870/18 Case No. 2020-00403
12-10-2020
James KASTON as Executor of the Estate of Sibilla Patrizi, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. G.T.I. ROLL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC., et al., Defendants-Appellants, Zain Qaiser, et al., Defendants.
McGaw, Alventosa & Zajac, Jericho (Andrew Zajac of counsel), for appellants. McCarney Law P.C., New York (James G. McCarney of counsel), for respondent.
McGaw, Alventosa & Zajac, Jericho (Andrew Zajac of counsel), for appellants.
McCarney Law P.C., New York (James G. McCarney of counsel), for respondent.
Manzanet–Daniels, J.P., Mazzarelli, Gesmer, Moulton, Shulman, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Adam Silvera, J.), entered December 2, 2019, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied the motion of defendants G.T.I. Roll Transportation Services Inc. and Francois Coulombe to change venue from New York County to Columbia County, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Although the subject motor vehicle accident occurred in Columbia County and the decedent passed away from her injuries there, defendants did not provide the required justification for a discretionary change of venue under CPLR 510(3) (see Bollman v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. , 17 A.D.3d 182, 183, 796 N.Y.S.2d 334 [1st Dept. 2005] ; Argano v. Scuderi , 6 A.D.3d 211, 774 N.Y.S.2d 323 [1st Dept. 2004] ). There is no dispute that New York County is a proper venue because plaintiff executor resided there when the complaint was filed (see CPLR 503[b] ).
A motion for a change of venue under CPLR 510(3) must be "supported by a statement detailing the identity and availability of proposed witnesses, the nature and materiality of their anticipated testimony and the manner in which they would be inconvenienced by the designated venue" ( Krochta v. On Time Delivery Serv., Inc. , 62 A.D.3d 579, 581, 879 N.Y.S.2d 428 [1st Dept. 2009] ). Here, defendants failed to show that the material witnesses had been contacted and would be willing to testify, and how they would be inconvenienced by having to testify in New York County (see Timan v. Sayegh, 49 A.D.3d 274, 274–275, 854 N.Y.S.2d 338 [1st Dept. 2008] ).