Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gonzalez v. Industrial Bank

New York Court of Appeals

Decided November 1, 1962Published

1Dissent

Fuld, J. (dissenting in part).

It seems to me that the defendants have confused the two questions which this case poses — where ‘ ‘ the cause of action arose ’ ’ within the sense of section 225 of the General Corporation Law and what law is to be applied. These are two separate and distinct matters. The statute has nothing to do with the choice of law question, the question as to whether the law of the forum or the law of the foreign jurisdiction is to be applied. The purpose of section 225 is to limit cases to be tried in New York to those which have some reasonable connection with this State…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hibernia National Bank v. . LacombeNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
  2. Swift & Co. v. Bankers Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1939
  3. Amsinck v. . RogersNew York Court of Appeals · 1907
  4. Matter of Electrolux CorporationNew York Court of Appeals · 1941
  5. People Ex Rel. Schick v. MarvinNew York Court of Appeals · 1936

1 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