Legal Opinion

Stratton v. Dueppengiesser

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 21, 2001PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiffs’ motion pursuant to CPLR 510 (3) seeking to change venue from Wyoming County to Erie County. Plaintiffs failed to establish that the convenience of material witnesses and the ends of justice would be promoted by the change (see, CPLR 510 [3]). ‘While calendar congestion is certainly a factor to be considered in deciding a motion to change venue pursuant to CPLR 510 (subd 3) * * * it is not controlling” (A.M.I. Intl. v Pool Sales & Serv., 94 AD2d 890). In any event, the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. A.M.I. International, Ltd. v. Gary Pool Sales & Service, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
  2. Schapiro & Reich v. FuchsbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  3. Ament v. Church of Annunciation of ElmaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. 1093 Group, LLC v. CanaleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
  2. PUTNAM-CORDOVANO, ROBIN v. CSX CORPORATIONAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API