AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

P.T.R. CO., respondent, v. HANNA TEITELBAUM, ETC., appellant.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant failed to move for a change of venue within 15 days after service of her demand Therefore, the motion was properly denied ( see CPLR 511[b]; Runcie v. Cross County Shopping Mall, 268 A.D.2d 577). The defendant's claim that she was misled as to the plaintiff's actual residence is not supported by the record. Accordingly, there exists no basis for her contention that her noncompliance with the time limit should be overlooked since she moved promptly after discovering the plaintiff's true residence.

RITTER, J.P., SMITH, FRIEDMANN, H. MILLER and CRANE, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

P.T.R. CO. v. TEITELBAUM
(Dec 15, 2003)