Premier Products Inc. v. Marjam Supply Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Premier Products Inc. v. Marjam Supply Co.

209 A.D.2d 498, 619 N.Y.S.2d 608, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11257

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

DecidedNovember 14, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 209 A.D.2d 498 (Premier Products Inc. v. Marjam Supply Co.) 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

Premier Products Inc. v. Marjam Supply Co., 209 A.D.2d 498, 619 N.Y.S.2d 608, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11257 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to receive payment for goods sold and delivered, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutner, J.), dated August 3, 1993, as denied its cross motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds of forum non conveniens.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Upon our review of the relevant factors in this case, we find that the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds of forum non conveniens (see, CPLR 327; see generally, Islamic Republic of Iran v Pahlavi, 62 NY2d 474, 478-479, cert denied 469 US 1108). Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Ritter, Pizzuto and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to receive payment for goods sold and delivered, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutner, J.), dated August 3, 1993, as denied its cross motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds of forum non conveniens.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Upon our review of the relevant factors in this case, we find that the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds of forum non conveniens (see, CPLR 327; see generally, Islamic Republic of Iran v Pahlavi, 62 NY2d 474, 478-479, cert denied 469 US 1108). Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Ritter, Pizzuto and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D.2d 498, 619 N.Y.S.2d 608, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11257, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/premier-products-inc-v-marjam-supply-co-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack