The motion was properly denied upon a record in which appellant failed to identify a single witness whose convenience would be better served by the proposed change of venue. Rather, appellant is, in essence, asking the court to assume that unidentified employees of the hospital in upper Manhattan where the alleged malpractice occurred would find it more convenient to travel to lower Manhattan than the Bronx. Suffice it to say that such an assumption may not substitute for...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
