From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Proc v. Oberlander

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 7, 2003
304 A.D.2d 545 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2002-10020.

Submitted March 19, 2003.

April 7, 2003.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Douglass, J.), dated September 20, 2002, which denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 510(3) to change the venue of the action from Kings County to Rockland County.

Calabrese Calabrese, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Dario DeLello of counsel), for appellant.

Panken, Besterman, Winer, Becker, New York, N.Y. (Kenneth A. Besterman of counsel), for respondents.

Before: ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, SANDRA L. TOWNES, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In support of his motion pursuant to CPLR 510(3) to change the venue of the action from Kings County to Rockland County based upon the convenience of material witness and the ends of justice, the defendant supplied an affidavit which failed to disclose the address of the prospective witness and failed to disclose the facts to which that witness was expected to testify at trial (see Fernandes v. Lawrence, 290 A.D.2d 412; Romero v. Mitchelltown Apts., 281 A.D.2d 612; Rich v. O'Connor, 212 A.D.2d 767). Accordingly, the motion was properly denied (see O'Brien v. Vassar Bros. Hosp., 207 A.D.2d 169, 172-173).

FLORIO, J.P., S. MILLER, TOWNES and MASTRO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Proc v. Oberlander

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 7, 2003
304 A.D.2d 545 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Proc v. Oberlander

Case Details

Full title:ZBIGNIEW PROC, et al., respondents v. DAVID OBERLANDER, appellant

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

Date published: Apr 7, 2003

Citations

304 A.D.2d 545 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
759 N.Y.S.2d 89