Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000

Dalton v. Barrett

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided August 7, 2000

275 A.D.2d 297; 712 N.Y.S.2d 566; 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8581

Cases that cite this one

6 later published cases cite this decision.

Ruiz v. Lazala (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
Greenberg v. Kruse (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
Carobert v. Baldor Electric Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Carobert v. Baldor Electric Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Pickering v. Westchester County Health Care Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
Figueroa v. Mari (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Leonard Barrett and Evadne Barrett appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), dated April 16, 1999, which denied their motion to change the venue of the action from Kings County to Nassau County.

*298Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Kings County, is directed to deliver to the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, all papers filed in this action and certified copies of all minutes and entries (see, CPLR 511 [d]).

None of the parties resided in Kings County at the time of the commencement of the action. Therefore, the plaintiffs choice of venue was improper, and she forfeited her right to select the venue of the action (see, CPLR 503 [a]; Bailon v Avis Rent A Car, 270 AD2d 439; Anderson v Ungar, 267 AD2d 186; Collins v Dart Tr. Co., 265 AD2d 368; Panco Dev. Corp. v Platek, 262 AD2d 292). The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the appellants’ timely motion to change the venue to Nassau County, where the plaintiff and at least one other defendant resided at the time of the commencement of the action (see, CPLR 503 [a]; 510, 511; Nixon v Federated Dept. Stores, 170 AD2d 659, 660). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.