Full text
Robin Putnam-Cordovano, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Zachary P. Nydahl, Deceased, Respondent, v. CSX Corporation Et Al., Appellants, Et Al., Defendants
Memorandum: CSX Corporation and CSX Transportation, Inc. (collectively, defendants) contend on appeal that Supreme Court should have granted their motion for a change of venue from Niagara County to Chautauqua County. We reject that contention. “A motion for a change of venue is addressed to the sound discretion of the court and, absent an improvident exercise of discretion, the court’s determination will not be disturbed on appeal” (County of Onondaga v Home Ins.
Cos., 265 AD2d 896, 896 [1999]; see 1093 Group, LLC v Canale, 72 AD3d 1561, 1562-1563 [2010]). In addition, general allegations of inconvenience or difficulty are insufficient to justify a change of venue (see Mroz v Ace Auto Body & Towing, 307 AD2d 403 [2003]). Based on the record before us, it cannot be said that the court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying de *1638 fendants’ motion (see 1093 Group, LLC, 72 AD3d at 1562-1563; Stratton v Dueppengiesser, 281 AD2d 991 [2001]; see also CPLR 510 [3]).
Present — Scudder, PJ., Centra, Fahey, Garni and Sconiers, JJ.