Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bryant v. Finnish National Airline

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided October 22, 1964Published

1Dissent

Eager, J. (dissenting).

I dissent from the determination of this court to dismiss this action. In any event, an adherence to due process requires that the matter should be remanded for a hearing.

I agree that CPLR 302 (subd. [a], par. 1) is not applicable where, as here, the cause of action did not arise from the business transacted by the defendant within the State. Nevertheless, if this defendant is “ doing business ” in the State, this court has acquired jurisdiction and this motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction must be denied. CPLR 301 continues the power of the courts…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
  3. Tauza v. . Susquehanna Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
  4. International Milling Co. v. Columbia Transportation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
  5. Augustus Blount v. Peerless Chemicals (p.r.) Inc., and Peerless Oil & Chemical Corp.,defendants-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API