Belding v. Ladd
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from special term, New York county. Action by Milo M. Belding against Eugene H. Ladd and William E. Small-man upon an alleged breach of warranty in the sale of horses at Malone, Franklin county. Defendants moved for a change of venue from New York county to Franklin county.
Read the full summary
Appeal from special term, New York county. Action by Milo M. Belding against Eugene H. Ladd and William E. Small-man upon an alleged breach of warranty in the sale of horses at Malone, Franklin county. Defendants moved for a change of venue from New York county to Franklin county. Defendant Smallman, in bis moving affidavit, asserts that he requires twenty-seven witnesses, all residing at ornear Malone, Franklin county, and the affidavits of four of these witnesses were presented. Plaintiff resides in New York city, and shows by his affidavit that he has six witnesses, besides himself,…
1Opinion of the CourtBarrett, J.
The motion to change the place of trial should, upon well-settled principles, have been granted. Where the number of material and necessary witnesses on each side is substantially equal, the place where the transaction occurred ought generally to control. Peck v. Parker, 15 Wkly. Dig. 142; Whitall v. Moshier, 7 N. Y. St. Rep. 390. In the present case, the affidavits clearly show that the defendants have a far greater number of witnesses in Franklin county than the plaintiff has in New York. Upon examining these afiidavits carefully, in connection with the pleadings, we are satisfied that,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Thompson v. NarwoodNew York Supreme Court · 1892