Edelman v. Taittinger S.A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Edelman v. Taittinger S.A.

8 A.D.3d 121, 778 N.Y.S.2d 484, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8349

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

DecidedJune 15, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 8 A.D.3d 121 (Edelman v. Taittinger S.A.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Edelman v. Taittinger S.A., 8 A.D.3d 121, 778 N.Y.S.2d 484, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8349 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered May 13, 2003, which set the earliest date on documents to be exchanged in jurisdictional discovery as 30 days prior to commencement of this action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Since the relevant inquiry under CFLR 301 is whether defendants were doing business in New York at the time the action was brought (see Lancaster v Colonial Motor Frgt. Line, 177 AD2d 152 [1992]), the IAS court properly exercised its discretion in limiting the jurisdictional discovery previously permitted by this Court (298 AD2d 301 [2002]) to 30 days prior to the filing of the complaint on November 5, 2000. Concur— Tom, J.P., Saxe, Ellerin, Marlow and Catterson, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered May 13, 2003, which set the earliest date on documents to be exchanged in jurisdictional discovery as 30 days prior to commencement of this action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Since the relevant inquiry under CFLR 301 is whether defendants were doing business in New York at the time the action was brought (see Lancaster v Colonial Motor Frgt. Line, 177 AD2d 152 [1992]), the IAS court properly exercised its discretion in limiting the jurisdictional discovery previously permitted by this Court (298 AD2d 301 [2002]) to 30 days prior to the filing of the complaint on November 5, 2000. Concur— Tom, J.P., Saxe, Ellerin, Marlow and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.3d 121, 778 N.Y.S.2d 484, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8349, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edelman-v-taittinger-sa-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack