In Samsun Logix, 31 Misc.3d 1226A, the court granted garnishee banks' motion to dismiss postjudgment enforcement proceedings based on the separate entity rule because the banks' New York branches did not hold the judgment debtors' assets and the banks' branches outside New York had not consented to personal jurisdiction.
Summary of this case from Bulk v. Bank of IndiaMay 12, 2011.
Attachment — Proceeding to Compel Delivery of Attached Property — Separate Entity Rule.
In Samsun Logix, 31 Misc.3d 1226A, the court granted garnishee banks' motion to dismiss postjudgment enforcement proceedings based on the separate entity rule because the banks' New York branches did not hold the judgment debtors' assets and the banks' branches outside New York had not consented to personal jurisdiction.
Summary of this case from Bulk v. Bank of IndiaFull title:Samsun Logix Corp. v. Bank of China
Court:Supreme Court of the State of New York. New York County
Date published: May 12, 2011
Plaintiff served a subpoena duces tecum on HSBC seeking 20 years of banking, transaction, investment, loan,…
Ayyash v. Koleilat( Cronan v. Schilling, 100 N.Y.S.2d at 476;Parbulk II v. Heritage Maritime, SA, 35 Misc.3d 235, 238, 935…