LONDON v. VERSUS TECHNOLOGY INC (1998)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Theodore LONDON, on Behalf of Himself and Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. VERSUS TECHNOLOGY, INC., Defendant-Appellant.

Decided: December 22, 1998

LERNER, P.J., SULLIVAN, MILONAS, ROSENBERGER and ELLERIN, JJ.

Scott W. Fisher, for Plaintiff-Respondent. Lawrence Greenapple, for Defendant-Appellant.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Ramos, J.), entered July 3, 1997, which, inter alia, denied defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint on grounds of lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(8), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We agree with the motion court that there was a sufficient showing that defendant engaged in purposeful business activity within the State to subject it to the jurisdiction of New York courts in this action (see, CPLR 302[a] [1]; George Reiner and Co. v. Schwartz, 41 N.Y.2d 648, 394 N.Y.S.2d 844, 363 N.E.2d 551; Longines-Wittnauer Watch Co., Inc. v. Barnes & Reinecke, Inc., 15 N.Y.2d 443, 261 N.Y.S.2d 8, 209 N.E.2d 68, cert. denied 382 U.S. 905, 86 S.Ct. 241, 15 L.Ed.2d 158).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network