Legal Opinion
Epstein v. Sirivejkul
New York Court of Appeals
Decided October 25, 1979PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
In granting the motion to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens, the Appellate Division did not abuse its discretion as a matter of law or in exercising that discretion fail to take into account all the various factors entitled to consideration (Irrigation & Ind. Dev. Corp. v Indag S. A., 37 NY2d 522, 525).
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Irrigation & Industrial Development Corp. v. Indag S. A.New York Court of Appeals · 1975
3Cited by13 opinions
- Ehrlich-Bober & Co. v. University of HoustonNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Blais v. DeyoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Silversmith v. Kenosha Auto TransportSupreme Court of Iowa · 1981
- Sullivan v. J.V. McNicholas Transfer Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Dawson v. SeenardineAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.