MWI Markenwerbung International Geschaftsleitung v. Perma Sharp Manufacturing Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

MWI Markenwerbung International Geschaftsleitung v. Perma Sharp Manufacturing Corp.

51 A.D.2d 520, 378 N.Y.S.2d 402, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10718

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

DecidedJanuary 20, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 520 (MWI Markenwerbung International Geschaftsleitung v. Perma Sharp Manufacturing Corp.) 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

MWI Markenwerbung International Geschaftsleitung v. Perma Sharp Manufacturing Corp., 51 A.D.2d 520, 378 N.Y.S.2d 402, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10718 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Order entered in the Supreme Court, New York County, on September 30, 1975 denying cross motions for summary judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs or disbursements. We agree with Special Term that there are issues of fact which must await trial resolution, among them, the validity of the agreement purporting to give the German court jurisdiction over the defendant. Additionally, there is a triable issue whether plaintiff breached the terms of the stipulation of July 19, 1973, whereby it agreed to take no action in the German court until the resolution of its motion to discontinue a New York action then pending between the parties. Defendant claims that, contrary to that stipulation, the plaintiff entered judgment against it by default in the German court on May 28, 1974 while plaintiffs motion to discontinue was still pending and undetermined. On this record neither party has shown entitlement to summary judgment and therefore we affirm. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Lupiano, Silverman, Lane and Nunez, JJ.

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

Order entered in the Supreme Court, New York County, on September 30, 1975 denying cross motions for summary judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs or disbursements. We agree with Special Term that there are issues of fact which must await trial resolution, among them, the validity of the agreement purporting to give the German court jurisdiction over the defendant. Additionally, there is a triable issue whether plaintiff breached the terms of the stipulation of July 19, 1973, whereby it agreed to take no action in the German court until the resolution of its motion to discontinue a New York action then pending between the parties. Defendant claims that, contrary to that stipulation, the plaintiff entered judgment against it by default in the German court on May 28, 1974 while plaintiffs motion to discontinue was still pending and undetermined. On this record neither party has shown entitlement to summary judgment and therefore we affirm. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Lupiano, Silverman, Lane and Nunez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 520, 378 N.Y.S.2d 402, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10718, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mwi-markenwerbung-international-geschaftsleitung-v-perma-sharp-nyappdiv-1976.