Legal Opinion
Schwartz v. Breakers Hotel Corp.
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 5, 1958PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMatthew M. Levy, J.
Appearing specially, the defendant moves to vacate the service of process upon it on the principal *509ground that the defendant is not doing business within the State of New York and is therefore not subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of this State. Whether or not a foreign corporation is ‘ ‘ doing business ” or is “ present ” in a jurisdiction is a question of fact which must he determined by analyzing the facts of the individual case under consideration (Pomeroy v. Hocking Val. Ry. Co., 218 N. Y. 530, 535; Chaplin v. Selznick, 293 N. Y. 529, 534; Brocia v. Franklin Plan Corp., 235 App.…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- McGee v. International Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Tauza v. . Susquehanna Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
- International Harvester Co. of America v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1914
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Carrolton Associates v. AbramsNew York Supreme Court · 1968
- Mirabella v. Banco Industrial de la Republica ArgentinaNew York Supreme Court · 1963
- Kimberly Knitwear, Inc. v. Mid-West Pool Car Ass'nCity of New York Municipal Court · 1959