Opinion
June 17, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.).
A motion for a change of venue made pursuant to CPLR 510 (3) must be supported by a statement identifying the nonparty witnesses expected to be called at trial, the nature of their testimony, and the manner in which they would be inconvenienced by having to testify in the county originally designated for trial (Clark v. New Rochelle Hosp. Med. Ctr., 170 A.D.2d 271; Frey v. Fun Tyme Ski Shop, 163 A.D.2d 11, 12). On their motion to change venue in this action, defendants failed to identify by name any potential nonparty witnesses. As defendants failed to meet their burden, their motion should have been denied.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Ellerin, Asch and Rubin, JJ.