From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Horowicz v. RSD Transportation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 27, 1998
249 A.D.2d 511 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

April 27, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On or about November 2, 1995, the defendant made a demand for a change of venue on the ground that the county designated by the plaintiffs was not a proper county pursuant to CPLR 510 (1). CPLR 511 (b) requires that a subsequent motion for a change of venue be made within 15 days after service of the demand (unless the plaintiffs have consented to the change). It is undisputed that the defendant did not move for that relief until on or about April 25, 1996. When such a motion is untimely, it is addressed to the court's discretion rather than based on right ( see, Fitzpatrick v. Sullivan, Magee Sullivan, 49 A.D.2d 902). In this case, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the motion. Clearly, the defendant's delay in moving for a change of venue was not caused by any willful omissions and misleading statements on the plaintiffs' part regarding their residence ( cf., Philogene v. Fuller Auto Leasing, 167 A.D.2d 178).

O'Brien, J.P., Ritter, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Horowicz v. RSD Transportation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 27, 1998
249 A.D.2d 511 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Horowicz v. RSD Transportation

Case Details

Full title:MIRIAM HOROWICZ et al., Respondents, v. RSD TRANSPORTATION, Appellant

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

Date published: Apr 27, 1998

Citations

249 A.D.2d 511 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
671 N.Y.S.2d 335

Citing Cases

Thomas v. Guttikonda

Thus, their motion "became one addressed to the court's discretion" ( Callanan Indus. v Sovereign Constr.…

Rosenberg v. Lajaunie

Thus, their motion "`became one addressed to the court's discretion'" ( Obas v Grappell, 43 AD3d 431, 432,…