Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Robin Putnam-Cordovano, Individually and As Administrator of the Estate of Zachary P. Nydahl, Deceased v. Csx Corporation

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department


December 30, 2011

ROBIN PUTNAM-CORDOVANO, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF ZACHARY P. NYDAHL, DECEASED,
PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
CSX CORPORATION, CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Niagara County (Richard C. Kloch, Sr., A.J.), entered February 1, 2011 in a wrongful death action.

Putnam-Cordovano v CSX Corp.

Appellate Division, Fourth Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on December 30, 2011

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, FAHEY, CARNI, AND SCONIERS, JJ.

The order denied the motion of defendants CSX Corporation and CSX Transportation, Inc. for a change of venue.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: CSX Corporation and CSX Transportation, Inc. (collectively, defendants) contend on appeal that Supreme Court should have granted their motion for a change of venue from Niagara County to Chautauqua County. We reject that contention. "A motion for a change of venue is addressed to the sound discretion of the court and, absent an improvident exercise of discretion, the court's determination will not be disturbed on appeal" (County of Onondaga v Home Ins. Cos., 265 AD2d 896, 896; see 1093 Group, LLC v Canale, 72 AD3d 1561, 1562-1563). In addition, general allegations of inconvenience or difficulty are insufficient to justify a change of venue (see Mroz v Ace Auto Body & Towing, 307 AD2d 403). Based on the record before us, it cannot be said that the court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying defendants' motion (see 1093 Group, LLC, 72 AD3d at 1562-1563; Stratton v Dueppengiesser, 281 AD2d 991; see also CPLR 510 [3]). Entered: December 30, 2011 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court

20111230

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.