Opinion
June 10, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly Cohen, J.).
The IAS Court properly dismissed the within complaint because of plaintiff's failure to obtain personal jurisdiction over defendants. In this case, "long-arm" personal jurisdiction pursuant to CPLR 302 (a) (1) is unavailable. The cause of action here clearly did not arise from the transactions which occurred in New York (see, Meunier v. Stebo, Inc., 38 A.D.2d 590). The horseback riding accident in St. Lucia bears little relationship to plaintiff's purchase of a travel package in New York from a travel agency unrelated to defendants.
Jurisdiction in New York is also unavailable under CPLR 301 since Le Sport Hotel's "presence" in New York is certainly not permanent and continuous (Tauza v. Susquehanna Coal Co., 220 N.Y. 259; see, Savoleo v. Couples Hotel, 136 A.D.2d 692). Le Sport has only minimal connections with New York besides the mailing of brochures to travel agencies and the infrequent advertising in newspapers. Moreover, Le Sport's maintenance of a bank account in New York is only incidental to its operation of a hotel in St. Lucia (cf., Frummer v. Hilton Hotels Intl., 19 N.Y.2d 533).
Finally, we agree with the IAS Court that any alleged negligence on the part of Le Sport cannot be attributable to defendant SRS. Indeed, SRS primarily operates a reservation service while Le Sport operates a hotel (see, Pentifallo v Hilton of Panama, 86 A.D.2d 583, appeal dismissed 56 N.Y.2d 855).
Concur — Carro, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.