Case Name: Carlos G. Morrison, Respondent, v. James J. Lawler, Defendant, and Scott W. Tomik et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2002-01-29
Citations: 290 A.D.2d 370
Docket Number: 
Parties: Carlos G. Morrison, Respondent, v James J. Lawler, Defendant, and Scott W. Tomik et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 290
Pages: 370–371

Head Matter:
Carlos G. Morrison, Respondent, v James J. Lawler, Defendant, and Scott W. Tomik et al., Appellants.
[736 NYS2d 596]

Opinion:
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton Tingling, J.), entered on or about August 22, 2001, which, in an action for personal injury and wrongful death arising out of a car accident, denied defendants' motion for a change of venue to Dutchess County, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Defendants' claim that the State Troopers and emergency medical technicians who responded to the subject car accident on a highway in Dutchess County would be inconvenienced by having to testify in New York County is not adequately supported with a showing of the asserted inconvenience, or the nature and relevance of their anticipated testimony (see, Schoen v Chase Manhattan Automotive Fin. Corp., 274 AD2d 345; Heinemann v Grunfeld, 224 AD2d 204; Prado v Walsh-Atkinson Co., 212 AD2d 489). We have considered defendants' other arguments, including the asserted inconvenience of the decedent's physician, and find them unavailing. Concur — Williams, J.P., Mazzarelli, Rosenberger, Wallach and Lerner, JJ.