Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
REGAL BOY ENTERPRISES INTERNATIONAL VII, INC., respondent, v. MLQ REALTY MANAGEMENT, LLC, appellant.
In an action, inter alia, to permanently enjoin the defendant from interfering with or interrupting the plaintiff's construction of its leasehold premises pursuant to a certain commercial lease, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Weiner, J.), dated November 22, 2004, as denied its cross motion to change the venue of the action from Rockland County to Dutchess County.
ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the cross motion is granted, and the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, is directed to deliver to the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, all papers filed in this action and certified copies of all minutes and entries (see CPLR 511[d] ).
The Supreme Court erred in denying the defendant's cross motion to change venue of the action from Rockland County to Dutchess County. The complaint seeks, inter alia, to permanently enjoin the defendant from interfering with or interrupting the plaintiff's construction of its leasehold premises. Although the plaintiff is a resident of Rockland County (see CPLR 503[c] ) and venue ordinarily would have been proper there, this action is one whose venue is “otherwise prescribed by law” (CPLR 503[a]; see Spellman Food Servs. v. Partrick, infra ). Because the relief sought “would affect the title to, or the possession, use or enjoyment of, real property” (CPLR 507) located in Dutchess County, venue is proper only in that county (see Fay's Inc. v. Park Centre Dev., 226 A.D.2d 1067, 1068, 642 N.Y.S.2d 103; Avis Rent-A-Car Sys. v. Edmin Realty Corp., 209 A.D.2d 656, 657-658, 619 N.Y.S.2d 334; Moschera & Catalano v. Advanced Structures Corp., 104 A.D.2d 306, 478 N.Y.S.2d 641; Spellman Food Servs. v. Partrick, 90 A.D.2d 791, 455 N.Y.S.2d 398; see generally Siegel, NY Prac. § 121, at 214 [4th ed.] ).
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: October 24, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)