AMPLICON INC v. CAPITAL VECTORS INCORPORATED (1997)

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Schackman, J.), entered September 20, 1996, awarding plaintiff damages and bringing up for review an order, same court and Justice, entered August 16, 1996, which, in an action to enforce a California judgment entered against defendants on default, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.   The appeal from the order is unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed within the appeal from the judgment.

Defendants on appeal do not challenge enforcement of the California judgment as against the corporate defendant.   With respect to the individual defendant, the California court had a basis for exercising its long-arm jurisdiction (see, China Express v. Volpi & Son Mach. Corp., 126 A.D.2d 239, 242, 513 N.Y.S.2d 388), which extends to the “outermost boundaries of due process” (Rocklin De Mexico v. Superior Court of Placer County, 157 Cal.App.3d 91, 94, 203 Cal.Rptr. 547, 548), by reason of the “effect” in California that his personnel guarantee had in inducing plaintiff to extend credit to the corporate defendant (Seagate Technology v. A.J. Kogyo Co., 219 Cal.App.3d 696, 268 Cal.Rptr. 586).   The individual defendant, as president and majority shareholder of the corporate defendant, which concededly had done business in California, stood to gain a real economic benefit from the corporate defendant's dealings with plaintiff (see, id., at 706, 268 Cal.Rptr. at 592, distinguishing Sibley v. Superior Ct. of Los Angeles, 16 Cal.3d 442, 128 Cal.Rptr. 34, 546 P.2d 322).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.