de Enamorado v. Central American Steamship Agency, Inc.

160 A.D.2d 182
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 3, 1990·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Michael J. Dontzin, J.), entered on or about September 5, 1989, which denied defendants’ motion for a protective order quashing plaintiffs notice of deposition and notice for production of documents as to defendant Victory Carriers, Inc., and which adjourned defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground of forum non conveniens until 60 days after the conclusion of the deposition of defendant Victory Carriers, Inc., is unanimously affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendants’ motion for a protective order. Plaintiff made the minimal required showing that the requested discovery of Victory could adduce facts establishing New York as a proper forum for this action. Since such facts would aid plaintiff in her opposition to the motion to dismiss, the court properly adjourned that motion until after completion of discovery. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Asch, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

de Enamorado v. Central American Steamship Agency, Inc., 160 A.D.2d 182 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

160 A.D.2d 182 (de Enamorado v. Central American Steamship Agency, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Garmendia v. O'Neill
46 A.D.3d 361 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)