Opinion
November 17, 1970
Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on March 3, 1970, unanimously reversed, on the law and in the exercise of discretion; appellant shall recover of respondents $50 costs and disbursements of this appeal; and defendant-appellant's motion to dismiss the complaint is granted, the complaint dismissed and the action severed as to defendant-appellant. Four of the causes of action, though asserted in behalf of both the individual and corporate plaintiffs, seek relief only in respect of the various matters in which defendants were retained as lawyers to represent the corporate plaintiff; the fifth cause, though based on fees alleged to have been paid by the individual plaintiff, recites only acts done by him as the corporation's officer and its alter ego. Whatever the extent of the individual plaintiff's involvement in the transactions sued upon, the ultimate relief sought would inure solely to the corporation's benefit. That corporation is Antiguan in origin, existence, and location, and all the acts set forth in the complaint took place in the West Indies, where the legal services for which defendants, residents of Trinidad, were retained, were performed or to be performed, and where the realty, subject of the transactions, is located. Thus, this action, whatever the recitals as to the individual plaintiff, is actually one by a nonresident corporation against nonresident defendants, and should not burden our courts. Nor is there any showing which would justify exercise of discretion to keep the suit here (see Bata v. Bata, 304 N.Y. 51). The fact that the individual plaintiff is a New York resident is not sufficient, nor is the happenstance that a defendant was personally served while on a visit here. Nor will it serve as a reason that our individual plaintiff is wary of bringing suit in a foreign jurisdiction; his adversaries might well be equally apprehensive about defending the action here.
Concur — Markewich, J.P., Nunez, McNally and Steuer, JJ.