From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lewin v. Four Seasons Solar Products Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 13, 1999
264 A.D.2d 716 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

Argued April 27, 1999

September 13, 1999

In an action to enforce a judgment entered in the United States District Court, District of South Carolina, dated June 18, 1997, in an action entitled Lewin v. Southerland, Case Number 2:96-3713-23, upon the default of the defendants in that action in appearing or answering, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Floyd, J.), dated May 5, 1998, which granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment in lieu of a complaint.

Winick Rich, P.C., New York, N.Y. (David M. Olasov of counsel), for respondents.

GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, J.P., LEO F. McGINITY, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, and NANCY E. SMITH. JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs seek to enforce a judgment entered in the United States District Court, District of South Carolina, dated June 18, 1997, in an action entitled Lewin v. Southerland, Case Number 2:96-3713-21, upon the default of the defendants in that action in appearing or answering. This court must afford full faith and credit to Federal judgments ( see, Union Commerce Leasing Corp. v. Kanbar, 155 A.D.2d 396; Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, 815 F.2d 857; cf, 28 U.S.C. § 1738). Contrary to the defendant's contention, the District Court properly found that it had sufficient "minimum contacts" ( International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316), with the State of South Carolina to authorize the exercise of personal jurisdiction over it ( see, ESAB Group v. Centricut, 126 F.3d 617, cert denied 523 U.S. 1048 [Mar. 30, 1998]; Stover v. O'Connell Assocs., 84 F.3d 132, 135-136, cert denied 519 U.S. 983). The defendant maintains franchises in South Carolina, advertises in South Carolina, and maintains contact with and solicits business from residents of South Carolina ( see, Hardy v. Pioneer Parachute Co., 531 F.2d 193). Thus, the District Court properly asserted personal jurisdiction over the defendant, and the judgment of the District Court was validly rendered.

KRAUSMAN, J.P.. McGINITY, FEUERSTEIN, and SMITH, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Lewin v. Four Seasons Solar Products Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 13, 1999
264 A.D.2d 716 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Lewin v. Four Seasons Solar Products Corp.

Case Details

Full title:A. Read Lewin, et al., respondents, v. Four Seasons Solar Products Corp.…

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

Date published: Sep 13, 1999

Citations

264 A.D.2d 716 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
694 N.Y.S.2d 749

Citing Cases

Republic of Kazakhstan v. Chapman

Stati v Republic of Kaz., 302 F.Supp.3d 187, 209 [DDC March 23, 2018]). The findings of the DC Court are…

Republic of Kaz. v. Chapman

Arguments that the award were obtained by fraud were indeed considered and rejected by the court in Sweden…