Opinion
10-13-2016
Eve KLEINFELD, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Marnin RAND, Defendant–Respondent.
Garvey Schubert Barer, New York (Maurice W. Heller of counsel), for appellant. Borenstein McConnell & Calpin, P.C., Brooklyn (Abraham Borenstein of counsel), for respondent.
Garvey Schubert Barer, New York (Maurice W. Heller of counsel), for appellant.
Borenstein McConnell & Calpin, P.C., Brooklyn (Abraham Borenstein of counsel), for respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Cynthia S. Kern, J.), entered May 1, 2015, which granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.
Dismissal of the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction was improper in this action on defendant's guaranty of a promissory note. Defendant is a New Jersey resident, but he came to New York two or three times—once or twice to negotiate the terms of the note, and once to negotiate his guaranty. Negotiating the terms of a note constitutes the transaction of business (see San Ysidro Corp. v. Robinow, 1 A.D.3d 185, 187, 768 N.Y.S.2d 191 [1st Dept.2003] ; CPLR 302[a][1] ), and by analogy, so does negotiating the terms of a guaranty of a note.
FRIEDMAN, J.P., RICHTER, FEINMAN, KAPNICK, KAHN, JJ., concur.