Opinion
15488 Index No. 156328/20 Case No. 2021-01637
03-10-2022
SHANGHAI YONGRUN INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT CO., LTD., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Maodong XU, Defendant–Respondent, Kashi Galaxy Venture Capital Co., Ltd., Defendant. George Bermann, Pamela Bookman, Hannah Buxbaum, John Coyle, William Dodge, Maggie Gardner, Thomas Lee, Aaron Simowitz, Paul Stephan, David Stewart, Edward Swaine, Symeon Symeonides, Louise Ellen Teitz, Andrea Wang and Christopher Whytock, Amici Curiae.
DGW Kramer LLP, New York (Katherine Burghardt Kramer of counsel), for appellant. Law Offices of Bing Li, LLC, New York (Bing Li of counsel), for respondent. Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, New York (Anton A. Ware of counsel), for amici curiae.
DGW Kramer LLP, New York (Katherine Burghardt Kramer of counsel), for appellant.
Law Offices of Bing Li, LLC, New York (Bing Li of counsel), for respondent.
Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, New York (Anton A. Ware of counsel), for amici curiae.
Manzanet–Daniels, J.P., Mazzarelli, Gonza´lez, Shulman, Rodriguez, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arthur F. Engoron, J.), entered on or about April 30, 2021, which granted defendants’ CPLR 3211(a)(1) motion to dismiss the complaint seeking to enforce a foreign money judgment pursuant to CPLR article 53, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion denied.
The allegations that defendants had an opportunity to be heard, were represented by counsel, and had a right to appeal in the underlying proceeding in the People's Republic of China (PRC) sufficiently pleaded that the basic requisites of due process were met (see CPLR 5304[a][1] ; CIBC Mellon Trust Co. v. Mora Hotel Corp., 100 N.Y.2d 215, 221–222, 762 N.Y.S.2d 5, 792 N.E.2d 155 [2003], cert denied 540 U.S. 948, 124 S.Ct. 399, 157 L.Ed.2d 279 [2003] ; Society of Lloyd's v. Grace, 278 A.D.2d 169, 718 N.Y.S.2d 327 [1st Dept. 2000] ). The court should not have dismissed the action on the ground that the U.S. State Department's 2018 and 2019 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices (Country Reports) conclusively refuted plaintiff's allegation that the PRC judgment was rendered under a system that comported with the requirements of due process. The Country Reports do not constitute "documentary evidence" under CPLR 3211(a)(1) (see Fontanetta v. John Doe 1, 73 A.D.3d 78, 86, 87, 898 N.Y.S.2d 569 [2d Dept. 2010] ; see also Armadillo Distrib. Enters., Inc. v. Hai Yun Musical Instruments Manufacture Co., 2014 WL 2815943, *4–6, 2014 U.S. Dist LEXIS 85015 [M.D. Fla. 2014] ; Palacios v. The Coca–Cola Co., 757 F. Supp. 2d 347, 359 [S.D. N.Y.2010], affd 499 Fed. Appx. 54 [2d Cir. 2012] ). In any event, the reports, which primarily discuss the lack of judicial independence in proceedings involving politically sensitive matters, do not utterly refute plaintiff's allegation that the civil law system governing this breach of contract business dispute was fair.