From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Studebaker Bros. Co. v. W.N.Y. P. Traction Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 21, 1910
140 App. Div. 308 (N.Y. App. Div. 1910)

Opinion

October 21, 1910.

Samuel F. Moran, for the appellant.

Mark W. Norman, for the respondent.

Present — INGRAHAM, P.J., McLAUGHLIN, LAUGHLIN, CLARKE and SCOTT, JJ.


Defendant appeals from an order denying its motion to change the place of trial from New York county to Cattaraugus county.

The action is for the price of an electric automobile omnibus sold by plaintiff to defendant. The defense is that the omnibus did not comply with the warranty upon which it was sold, and that defendant consequently refused to accept it. Each party names about a dozen witnesses who are alleged to be necessary and material. All of them appear to be in the employ of one or the other of the parties. The contract was made in Olean, Cattarugus county; the omnibus was tested there, and it still remains there. In so far as concerns the inconvenience of procuring witnesses to attend upon the trial the parties stand upon a substantially equal footing. Wherever the cause is tried one of the parties must be put to inconvenience and expense.

Under such circumstances, it is the general rule that the place where the contract was made, and where the subject-matter of the action is to be found, will determine the place of trial.

The order appealed from is reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion to change the place of trial granted.


Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted.


Summaries of

Studebaker Bros. Co. v. W.N.Y. P. Traction Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 21, 1910
140 App. Div. 308 (N.Y. App. Div. 1910)
Case details for

Studebaker Bros. Co. v. W.N.Y. P. Traction Co.

Case Details

Full title:STUDEBAKER BROTHERS COMPANY OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v . WESTERN NEW YORK…

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

Date published: Oct 21, 1910

Citations

140 App. Div. 308 (N.Y. App. Div. 1910)
125 N.Y.S. 224

Citing Cases

Woodland Lumber Manufacturing Co. v. Barnett

"In transitory actions, the action should be tried in the county where the transactions involved in the…

Spanedda v. Murphy

The contract was made in the county of Schoharie; it was there to be performed; any failure to carry out its…