From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Koutras v. Lacorazza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 9, 1998
248 A.D.2d 514 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

March 9, 1998

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


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The burden of establishing that New York is an inconvenient forum rests with the party challenging that forum ( see, Islamic Republic of Iran v. Pahlavi, 62 N.Y.2d 474, cert. denied 469 U.S. 1108; Sarfaty v. Rainbow Helicopters, 221 A.D.2d 618). As a determination of this issue rests within the discretion of the trial court, so long as the court has examined the relevant circumstances, its determination will not be disturbed ( see, Sarfaty v. Rainbow Helicopters, supra, at 619). In the instant action, the defendant has failed to demonstrate that New Jersey is a more appropriate forum than New York ( see, Brodherson v. Ponte Sons, 209 A.D.2d 276).

Mangano, P. J., Miller, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Koutras v. Lacorazza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 9, 1998
248 A.D.2d 514 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Koutras v. Lacorazza

Case Details

Full title:DENNIS KOUTRAS et al., Respondents, v. THOMAS LACORAZZA, Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 9, 1998

Citations

248 A.D.2d 514 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
669 N.Y.S.2d 898

Citing Cases

Weitz v. Weitz

This determination is within the discretion of the trial court. Koutras v. Lacorazza, 248 A.D.2d 514 (2d…

NOAH'S ARK PROCESSORS, LLC v. PARENTE

This determination is within the discretion of the trial court. Koutras v. Lacorazza, 248 A.D.2d 514 (2d…