Legal Opinion
Mollendo Equipment Co. v. Sekisan Trading Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided February 16, 1978PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*918OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
Order affirmed, with costs. As the pleadings and affidavits were framed, the Appellate Division was entitled to find, as it did, that New York is an inconvenient forum for this litigation. It would also have been entitled to find otherwise, especially since any forum would have been inconvenient for court and parties. But the Appellate Division has been granted considerable discretion in this area, and, on the record made by the parties, it cannot be said that the discretion was abused as a matter of law (Irrigation & Ind. Dev. Corp. v IndagS. A., 37 NY2d 522,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Irrigation & Industrial Development Corp. v. Indag S. A.New York Court of Appeals · 1975
3Cited by5 opinions
- Epstein v. SirivejkulAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- Barcelona Hotel, Ltd. v. HadlowAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
- Obex Trading Corp. v. MaravenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- P.T. Delami Garment Industries v. di TorinoNew York Supreme Court · 1994
- American BankNote Corp. v. DanieleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007