Gantuz v. Dominican Steamship Line

22 Misc. 2d 567, 198 N.Y.S.2d 421, 1960 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3530
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 24, 1960
StatusPublished

This text of 22 Misc. 2d 567 (Gantuz v. Dominican Steamship Line) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gantuz v. Dominican Steamship Line, 22 Misc. 2d 567, 198 N.Y.S.2d 421, 1960 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3530 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1960).

Opinion

Morris E. Spector, J.

Motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the court lacks jurisdiction of the action is denied.

Plaintiff is a citizen of the Dominican Republic who signed on a ship of that flag and registry in that country. Defendant steamship line is a corporation organized under the laws of the Dominican Republic. The accident occurred in Plymouth Harbor, Massachusetts, and recovery is sought under the Jones Act by plaintiff, who is now a resident of Bronx County (and has been at least since July 22,1958).

In Romero v. International Term. Co. (358 U. S. 354) a Spanish subject signed on a ship of Spanish flag and registry which was owned by a Spanish corporation. The plaintiff there was injured while the ship was in port in Hoboken, N. J. The Supreme Court held that the plaintiff in that ease could not sue the Spanish corporation in United States courts since ‘ ‘ the foreign law provides a remedy for the injury, and claims under that law may be conveniently asserted ” (p. 383). The holdings in both the Romero case (supra) and in Lauritzen v. Larsen (345 U. S. 571) clearly indicate that the transitory character of those plaintiffs ’ presence in the United States and the easy availability of a remedy in the foreign forum were the basis for refusing jurisdiction. This court cannot compel a resident of this State to seek relief in a jurisdiction that is lacking in due process, as is the Dominican Republic, especially since he alleges that he would be imprisoned on his return to that dictatorship for having brought this suit and for having alleged in his affidavit on this motion that he desires to become a citizen of the United States of America.

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

Related

Lauritzen v. Larsen
345 U.S. 571 (Supreme Court, 1953)
Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co.
358 U.S. 354 (Supreme Court, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
22 Misc. 2d 567, 198 N.Y.S.2d 421, 1960 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3530, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gantuz-v-dominican-steamship-line-nysupct-1960.