This court is not required to consider plaintiffs' argument, raised for the first time on appeal, that there are special circumstances which warrant departure from the general rule that venue in a consolidated case should be placed in the county where the first action was initially commenced (Dickerhof v Port Auth., 174 A.D.2d 506). Moreover, were we to consider the argument, we would find it to be without merit, inasmuch as plaintiffs' submissions lack the requisite specificity (see, Harris v Havanera Tropical Mkt. Corp., 160 A.D.2d 344). Given the residence of several of the parties in Westchester County, we see no basis to disturb the exercise of discretion by the hearing court in placing venue of the consolidated action in Westchester County, where the first action was brought.
Concur — Carro, J.P., Rosenberger, Kupferman, Ross and Rubin, JJ.