Legal Opinion
Lehman Bros. v. Hughes Hubbard & Reed, L. L. P.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided December 22, 1998PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
The issue here is whether the present action was timely commenced in this State by invocation of the statutory tolling provision under CPLR 205 (a) when the same action was previously dismissed by the courts of Texas for defendant’s lack of minimum contacts with that State. In determining this appeal, we assume, without deciding, the applicability of CPLR 205 (a) and conclude that plaintiffs New York action was untimely, since it was commenced more than six months after termination of the Texas…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cohoes Housing Authority v. Ippolito-Lutz, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- Shearson Lehman Bros., Inc. v. Hughes, Hubbard, & Reed, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1995
- Cohoes Housing Authority v. Ippolito-Lutz, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1980
3Cited by29 opinions
- Andrea v. Arnone, Hedin, Casker, Kennedy & Drake, Architects & Landscape Architects, P.C.New York Court of Appeals · 2005
- Malay v. City of SyracuseNew York Court of Appeals · 2015
- Bank of New York Mellon v. SlavinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Mizrahi v. US Bank, National Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Joseph Francese, Inc. v. Enlarged City School DistrictNew York Court of Appeals · 2000
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.