
    William Smerling, App’lt, v. Wilson P. Foss, Resp’t.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department,
    
    
      Filed July 22, 1892.)
    
    Venue—Change oe—Action on contract.
    In an action for wages, claimed on a contract made in R. county for employment in that county, the defendant claiming that the contract was to be entered into only on condition that the plaintiff would inform himself as to the operation of the business, which he f liled to do, and also alleging incompetency and abandonment of the work by plaintiff, Held, that the place of trial was properly changed to R. county.
    Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the Kings county special term, changing the place of trial to Rockland county.
    
      J. Edward Swanstrom, for app’lt; Irving Browne, for resp’t.
   Barnard, P. J.

—The contract for the employment of the defendant by the plaintiff is stated to have been made at Haverstraw, Rockland county. The place where the work of the employment was to be done was at Haverstraw. These are two controlling reasons in cases involving the place of trial of issue upon the contract. The agreement is not admitted, but is claimed by the defendant to have been entered into by him upon a condition that plaintiff would inform himself as to the operation and details of the business, which he failed to do. The answer also alleges incompetency to do the work of the employment; that he was disobedient and finally abandoned the work. The place of trial wa& properly changed to Eockland county.

Order affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

Dykman and Cullen, JJ., concur.  