Case ID: ny-sup-ct_80/html/0255-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Yan Brunt, P. J. :", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Julius Imgard and Another, Respondents, v. Walter B. Duffy, Appellant.
    
      Venue — affidavit required on a motion to change it.
    
    Appeal by the defendant, Walter B. Duffy, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the city and county of New York on the 12th day of May, 1893, denying defendant’s motion for a change of venue.
    
      M. H. Briggs, for the appellant.
    
      Welch <& Daniels, for the respondents.
   Yan Brunt, P. J. :

The opinion of the court in the case of Thurfjell v. Witherbee (70 Hun, 401) seems to be entirely applicable to the case at bar. The defendant swears to his expectations, and-that is all. Within the principles laid down in the case cited, this is not sufficient to justify the court in granting the motion to change the venue. The party should state at least upon what his expectations are founded, so that the court may say that there is some ground for the hopes expressed.

The order should, therefore, be affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, with leave to the defendant, upon payment of the costs of this appeal and the costs of the motion in the court below, to renew the application to change the venue upon new papers.

O’Brien, J., concurred.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, with leave to the defendant, upon payment of the costs of this appeal and the costs of the motion in the court below, to renew the application to change the venue upon new papers.