ESQ HQNEW YORK LAW WATCH

District Court, Suffolk County, Fourth District · May 13, 2025 · 89 Misc 3d 915

KRINSKY-SAY LLC v PLAY PRO

Read the official decision: 89 Misc 3d 915

This record is held from search listings because it does not meet the site’s substance floor; the official text is linked below.

Holding The court determined that filing a summary proceeding in the wrong district constitutes a venue defect rather than a jurisdictional one. Consequently, the court exercised its authority to transfer the case to the proper district where the property is located.

The court’s words

the court finds that the case was inappropriately filed in Smithtown’s Fourth District Court and hereby transfers the case to Islip’s Fifth District Court

89 Misc 3d 915, at the official text

the court finds the defect at issue to be one of venue and that the parties and proceeding at bar qualify for transfer

89 Misc 3d 915, at the official text

the location of the property merely determines venue, or place of trial

89 Misc 3d 915, at the official text
CourtDistrict Court, Suffolk County, Fourth District
DecidedMay 13, 2025
Citation89 Misc 3d 915
Area of lawLandlord and Tenant and Housing · Civil Procedure
WeekWeek ending May 17, 2025
Official textOfficial decision: 89 Misc 3d 915
Source feedNew York advance sheet: 26nyadv37.pdf
Law Watch record id90

Recommended citation

ESQ HQ, New York Law Watch, KRINSKY-SAY LLC v PLAY PRO, 89 Misc 3d 915 (District Court, Suffolk County, Fourth District, May 13, 2025), https://esqhq.com/decisions/89-misc-3d-915/

How this record was made

Holding drafted by Law Watch’s in-house model, graded by three reviewers; every quotation verified word for word against the official text.

Read how Law Watch works

Published May 13, 2025. Updated May 13, 2025.