Rosenberg v. Cosgrove

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rosenberg v. Cosgrove

212 A.D.2d 521, 623 N.Y.S.2d 121, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1106

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

DecidedFebruary 6, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 212 A.D.2d 521 (Rosenberg v. Cosgrove) 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

Rosenberg v. Cosgrove, 212 A.D.2d 521, 623 N.Y.S.2d 121, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1106 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for negligent hiring, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roncallo, J.), dated September 22, 1993, which, upon an order of the same court, dated August 18, 1993, granting the defendants’ motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (8) to dismiss the complaint, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We reject the plaintiff’s contention that personal jurisdiction over the defendants was established under CPLR 302 (a) [522]*522(3) (ii). The plaintiff failed to establish that he sustained an injury within the State (see, Herman v Sharon Hosp., 135 AD2d 682; Weiss v Greenberg, Traurig, Askew, Hoffman, Lipoff, Quentel & Wolff, 85 AD2d 861). Moreover, the plaintiff did not establish that the defendants derived substantial revenue from interstate or international commerce. Finally, under the circumstance of this case, where the defendants treated the plaintiff exclusively in Pennsylvania, to impose jurisdiction upon them would offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice (see, Etra v Matta, 94 AD2d 581, affd 61 NY2d 455). Sullivan, J. P., Miller, Copertino, Joy and Friedmann, 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 negligent hiring, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roncallo, J.), dated September 22, 1993, which, upon an order of the same court, dated August 18, 1993, granting the defendants’ motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (8) to dismiss the complaint, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We reject the plaintiff’s contention that personal jurisdiction over the defendants was established under CPLR 302 (a) [522]*522(3) (ii). The plaintiff failed to establish that he sustained an injury within the State (see, Herman v Sharon Hosp., 135 AD2d 682; Weiss v Greenberg, Traurig, Askew, Hoffman, Lipoff, Quentel & Wolff, 85 AD2d 861). Moreover, the plaintiff did not establish that the defendants derived substantial revenue from interstate or international commerce. Finally, under the circumstance of this case, where the defendants treated the plaintiff exclusively in Pennsylvania, to impose jurisdiction upon them would offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice (see, Etra v Matta, 94 AD2d 581, affd 61 NY2d 455). Sullivan, J. P., Miller, Copertino, Joy and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

212 A.D.2d 521, 623 N.Y.S.2d 121, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1106, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosenberg-v-cosgrove-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack