From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kirschner v. Cusa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 17, 1995
211 A.D.2d 665 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

January 17, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Orange County (Barone, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Orange County, is directed to deliver to the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Ulster County, all the papers filed in the action and certified copies of all minutes and entries (see, CPLR 511 [d]).

The plaintiffs, residents of Ulster County, improperly designated venue of this action in Orange County, where none of the parties reside, thereby forfeiting their right to designate venue (see, CPLR 503 [a]; Kaplan v. Waldbaum's Inc., 208 A.D.2d 683; Nixon v. Federated Dept. Stores, 170 A.D.2d 659). With their answer the defendants served a demand to change venue and timely moved to change venue to Ulster County, where they also reside. Consequently, the Supreme Court should have granted the motion (see, CPLR 510; 511; Kaplan v. Waldbaum's Inc., supra; Nixon v. Federated Dept. Stores, supra, at 660). Sullivan, J.P., Rosenblatt, Altman, Hart and Friedmann, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Kirschner v. Cusa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 17, 1995
211 A.D.2d 665 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Kirschner v. Cusa

Case Details

Full title:LARRY KIRSCHNER et al., Respondents, v. MICHAEL J. CUSA et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Jan 17, 1995

Citations

211 A.D.2d 665 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
622 N.Y.S.2d 63

Citing Cases

Ward v. National Car Rental

Here, however, the record reveals that none of the parties resided in Queens County at the commencement of…

Hoskins v. Kung

Plaintiffs commenced this action in Monroe County, where none of the parties resides. That was improper (…