Majority
Headnote
Appeal from an order of the Tioga special term, denying motion to change the place of trial from Chemung county to Monroe county on the ground of convenience of witnesses.—Appellant criticizes the affidavit of the respondent used upon the motion. The appeal book does not show that any objection was taken to the form of the affidavit at the special term ■ however, we are of the opinion that the criticism is not controlling. We think the affidavit was not fatally defective.
We have had occasion to express our views in Gilbert v. Shortsville Cart Company, decided at this term (see opinion of Hardin, P. J.), upon the subject of the criticism made to the affidavit, as well as upon the rule applicable to motions of this character.
After a careful examination of the affidavits used on either side, we are of the opinion that we ought not to interfere with the discretion exercised at the special term. We, therefore, sustain its order.
Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements
Martin and Merwin, JJ., concur.