Refalas v. Kontogiannis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Refalas v. Kontogiannis

44 A.D.3d 624, 848 N.Y.S.2d 180

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

DecidedOctober 2, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 44 A.D.3d 624 (Refalas v. Kontogiannis) 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

Refalas v. Kontogiannis, 44 A.D.3d 624, 848 N.Y.S.2d 180 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendants Thomas Kontogiannis, Olympicorp International Limited, Interamerican Mortgage Corp., C.I.P. Mortgage Corp., Olympicorp International LLC, Domika Ylika Thraces S.A., and Domoblock S.A., appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Satterfield, J.), dated January 3, 2006, which denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 327 to [625]*625dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them on the ground of forum non conveniens.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On a motion pursuant to CPLR 327 to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens, the burden is on the movant to demonstrate the relevant private or public interest factors which militate against accepting the litigation (see Islamic Republic of Iran v Pahlavi, 62 NY2d 474 [1984], cert denied 469 US 1108 [1985]; Stravalle v Land Cargo, Inc., 39 AD3d 735 [2007]). Among the factors the court must weigh are the residency of the parties, the potential hardship to proposed witnesses, the availability of an alternative forum, the situs of the actionable events, and the burden which will be imposed upon the New York courts, with no one single factor controlling (see Stravalle v Land Cargo, Inc., 39 AD3d at 735). In general, the trial court’s determination will not be disturbed on appeal unless the court failed to properly consider all the relevant factors (id.). Here, we find no basis to disturb the Supreme Court’s determination.

Moreover, the appellants are guilty of laches. Having participated in the action for more than two years, through voluminous disclosure and the filing of a note of issue, the appellants cannot now claim that New York is an inconvenient forum (see Bock v Rockwell Mfg. Co., 151 AD2d 629 [1989]; Corines v Dobson, 135 AD2d 390 [1987]). Miller, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendants Thomas Kontogiannis, Olympicorp International Limited, Interamerican Mortgage Corp., C.I.P. Mortgage Corp., Olympicorp International LLC, Domika Ylika Thraces S.A., and Domoblock S.A., appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Satterfield, J.), dated January 3, 2006, which denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 327 to [625]*625dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them on the ground of forum non conveniens.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On a motion pursuant to CPLR 327 to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens, the burden is on the movant to demonstrate the relevant private or public interest factors which militate against accepting the litigation (see Islamic Republic of Iran v Pahlavi, 62 NY2d 474 [1984], cert denied 469 US 1108 [1985]; Stravalle v Land Cargo, Inc., 39 AD3d 735 [2007]). Among the factors the court must weigh are the residency of the parties, the potential hardship to proposed witnesses, the availability of an alternative forum, the situs of the actionable events, and the burden which will be imposed upon the New York courts, with no one single factor controlling (see Stravalle v Land Cargo, Inc., 39 AD3d at 735). In general, the trial court’s determination will not be disturbed on appeal unless the court failed to properly consider all the relevant factors (id.). Here, we find no basis to disturb the Supreme Court’s determination.

Moreover, the appellants are guilty of laches. Having participated in the action for more than two years, through voluminous disclosure and the filing of a note of issue, the appellants cannot now claim that New York is an inconvenient forum (see Bock v Rockwell Mfg. Co., 151 AD2d 629 [1989]; Corines v Dobson, 135 AD2d 390 [1987]). Miller, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 A.D.3d 624, 848 N.Y.S.2d 180, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/refalas-v-kontogiannis-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack