AROUH v. BUDGET LEASING INC (2009)

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

Michael AROUH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BUDGET LEASING, INC., also known as Roger Beasley Porsche, Defendant-Respondent.

Decided: June 11, 2009

TOM, J.P., NARDELLI, CATTERSON, RENWICK, RICHTER, JJ.

Michael Arouh, appellant pro se. Murtagh, Cohen & Byrne, Rockville Centre (John E. Gray of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered May 2, 2008, which granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendant's negotiation of the potential purchase of an automobile via email and telephone, which was initiated by plaintiff after viewing the car on defendant's website, is insufficient to constitute the “transaction” of business within New York (see Granat v. Bochner, 268 A.D.2d 365, 702 N.Y.S.2d 262 [2000] ), and, since the car was to be picked up in Texas, there was no contract to “supply goods or services in the state” (CPLR 302[a] [1] ). Defendant's website, which described available cars and featured a link for email contact but did not permit a customer to purchase a car, was not a projection of defendant into the State (see Haber v. Studium, Inc., 22 Misc.3d 1129(A), 2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 50368(U), 2009 WL 565185, *4-5 [2009] ).

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Out of date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