Carey v. Five Brothers, Inc.
Opinion of the Court
— In a consolidated action to recover damages for personal injuries, etcetera, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ambrosio, J.), dated October 1, 2007, which granted the motion of the defendant Darr Contracting
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
Under the circumstances, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in changing the venue of this action from Kings County to Suffolk County (see Canaan v Costco Wholesale Membership, Inc., 49 AD3d 583, 584-585 [2008]; Clase v Sidoti, 20 AD3d 330, 331 [2005]; Crew v St. Joseph’s Med. Ctr., 19 AD3d 205, 206 [2005]; Halina Yin Fong Chow v Long Is. R.R., 202 AD2d 154, 155 [1994]; Caplin v Ranhofer, 167 AD2d 155, 157 [1990]).
The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit. Prudenti, P.J., Dillon, Covello and Leventhal, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.