From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coudert Brothers v. Malmrose

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 11, 2000
268 A.D.2d 261 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

January 11, 2000

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered December 21, 1998, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, after a full evidentiary hearing, granted defendant Malmrose's motion to dismiss the complaint as against him for lack of personal jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Richard Anthony DePalma for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Edward P. Gilbert for Defendants-Respondents.

NARDELLI, J.P., TOM, LERNER, RUBIN, SAXE, JJ.


The motion court properly dismissed the complaint against defendant Malmrose based on plaintiff's failure to establish at the pretrial hearing that Malmrose, who is not a New York resident, had transacted business within the State, subjecting him to jurisdiction pursuant to CPLR 302(a)(1), or that he had committed a tort within the State, subjecting him to jurisdiction pursuant to CPLR 302(a)(2).

The court properly exercised its broad discretion in supervising the discovery process (see, Allen v. Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 N.Y.2d 403, 406) when it limited disclosure to the jurisdictional issue.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Coudert Brothers v. Malmrose

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 11, 2000
268 A.D.2d 261 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Coudert Brothers v. Malmrose

Case Details

Full title:COUDERT BROTHERS, etc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JOHN H. MALMROSE, et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 11, 2000

Citations

268 A.D.2d 261 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
700 N.Y.S.2d 698

Citing Cases

Sexter v. Kimmelman

The court properly exercised its discretion in ordering plaintiffs to produce to defendant partners of…

Perez v. Presbyterian Hospital

In response, plaintiff failed to adduce evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to her…