Opinion
May 20, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.).
The motion court correctly held that long-arm jurisdiction (CPLR 302[a][1]) could have been obtained over defendant with respect to both of plaintiff's causes of action, the first of which alleges the parties' maintenance of a joint bank account in New York and defendant's drawing of a check on that account to plaintiff's order that was dishonored for insufficient funds, and the second of which alleges defendant's withdrawal of funds from the account in an amount that exceeded his interest therein ( see, Bankers Trust Co. v. Suarez, 526 F. Supp. 1262; Catauro v. Goldome Bank for Sav., 189 A.D.2d 747; cf., Masonite Corp. v. Hellenic Lines, 412 F. Supp. 434, 438-439). Accordingly, the tolling provision of CPLR 207 does not apply (CPLR 207), and the complaint was properly dismissed as time-barred.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Nardelli, Rubin and Williams, JJ.