Case Name: Frederick Klienhans, App'lt, v. Charles L. Whiting et al., Resp'ts
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1890-10-23
Citations: 33 N.Y. St. Rep. 956
Docket Number: 
Parties: Frederick Klienhans, App’lt, v. Charles L. Whiting et al., Resp’ts.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 33
Pages: 956–958

Head Matter:
Frederick Klienhans, App’lt, v. Charles L. Whiting et al., Resp’ts.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Fifth Department,
Filed October 23, 1890.)
Venue—Breach oe contract.
Defendants, who were in business in Buffalo, made a boiler for use on plaintiff’s boat in the county of Monroe, and agreed that it should stand a pressure of 140 pounds and be allowed to do so by the government inspectors, On inspection it proved defective and plaintiff was damaged. Defendants undertook to repair it, but did not succeed. The inspection and repairs took place in Monroe county. In an action to recover such damages, Held, that as all the matters in issue arose in Monroe county, the venue was properly in that county, and that an order changing the place of trial to Brie county, for .the convenience of witnesses, was improper.
(Corlett, J., dissents.)
’Appeal from order changing place of trial from the county of Monroe to the county of Brie.
Action to recover damages alleged to have been sustained by the defective construction of a boiler. Plaintiff resides in the county of Monroe and runs a passenger steamer between Charlotte and Long Pond, in that county. In January, 1889, he ordered of defendants, who are engaged in business in Buffalo, an engine for use in his steamer, and they agreed to furnish one that would stand a pressure of 140 pounds to the square inch and be allowed to carry that pressure by the government inspectors. In May following they delivered a boiler to plaintiff, but when tested by the government inspector it was found defective and gave out long before the required pressure was put upon it. Plaintiff was obliged, in consequence, to hire another steamer and spend large amounts in repairs and for the wages of his men while idle.
The answer alleged that the boiler was broken because it had been .tampered with and injured by plaintiff’s servants before the test was made. It also set up counterclaims for a balance due on the boiler and for repairs. Plaintiff’s reply admits the balance to be due, but alleges that such repairs were made by defendants on their own motion, and to remedy the defects and comply with the contract. The inspection and repairs took place in Monroe county.
J. & Q: Van Voorhis, for app’lt; White & Simons, for resp’ts.

Opinion:
Order appealed from reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, for the reason that all the matters in issue arose in Monroe county.
Dwight, P. J., and Macomber, J., concur.