Hill v. Citicorp, Citibank, N.A.
This text of 190 A.D.2d 618 (Hill v. Citicorp, Citibank, N.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.
Opinion
— Order, Supreme Court, New [619]*619York County (William Davis, J.), entered on or about April 3, 1992, which denied defendants’ motion for dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
A review of the evidence demonstrates that defendants have failed to overcome the strong presumption of the appropriateness of plaintiffs’ choice of forum (see, Islamic Republic v Pahlavi, 62 NY2d 474). Moreover, in light of the various relevant factors which the IAS Court clearly noted, and considering the apparent unavailability of full relief in an English court, there was no abuse of discretion in denying the motion (supra). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
190 A.D.2d 618, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-citicorp-citibank-na-nyappdiv-1993.