Published on:

By

Under New York law, a court “may exercise personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant based either on general jurisdiction under [New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules (“CPLR”)] § 301, or specific jurisdiction, under CPLR § 302.” Overseas Ventures, LLC v. ROW Mgmt., Ltd., No. 12-CV-1033, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159097, 2012 WL 5363782, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 26, 2012). “Under CPLR § 301 general jurisdiction, which arises out of a defendant’s contacts with the forum even if the contacts are unrelated to the action before the Court, is established over a foreign [defendant] engaging in a ‘continuous and systematic course of doing business in New York.'” TAGC Mgmt., LLC v. Lehman, 842 F. Supp. 2d 575, 581 (S.D.N.Y. 2012).  Under Section 302(a) the state can obtain long arm jurisdiction if:

Section 302(a) provides in relevant part:

A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over any non-domiciliary, or his executor or administrator, who in person or through an agent:

  1. transacts any business within the state or contracts anywhere to supply goods or services in the state; or
    2. commits a tortious act within the state, except as to a cause of action for defamation of character arising from the act; or
    3. commits a tortious act without the state causing injury to person or property within the state, except as to a cause of action for defamation of character arising from the act, if he

(i) regularly does or solicits business, or engages in any other persistent course of conduct, or derives substantial revenue from goods used or consumed or services rendered, in the state, or
(ii) expects or should reasonably expect the act to have consequences in the state and derives substantial revenue from interstate or international commerce; or

  1. owns, uses or possesses any real property situated within the state.

CPLR § 302 emphasis added

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Do you work in or with the construction industry?  If so, chances are you have heard of The United States Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration, otherwise known by the abbreviation “OSHA”.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

What happens if, as a result of negligence, a person dies in the State of New York but they do not have any immediate family members to administrate their estate?  Does, any potential lawsuit against a third party become lost?  The short answer is no, the opportunity for a lawsuit does not become lost, but the process in which to initiate a lawsuit becomes much more complicated.  The following is a brief overview of the process for filing a wrongful death lawsuit when a person dies without a will and without a distributee who is also a qualified person to administrate the estate under the New York EPTL.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

In current medicine it is extremely common for persons who have developed ventral hernias due to prior surgery, child birth or injury to undergo a hernia repair operation where the surgeon elects to use a mesh patch to repair the hernia.  History has dictated that this is a relatively safe procedure if done properly using generally accepted procedure, but can be extremely dangerous or even deadly if done improperly.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Unfortunately, it happens, your case gets marked off the trial calendar.  Even worse, it happened through no fault of your own.  How so? Your action was consolidated with other cases, and while you have been timely complying with adversary demands and court orders, the other plaintiffs are no so diligent.  The result – the note of issue is vacated and all the consolidated cases are marked off the calendar as a result of the other plaintiffs’ failure to comply with orders and/or reply to demands.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Last week New Yorkers witnessed a fatal crane collapse in TriBeCa.  The catastrophic event was caught on a spectator’s camera phone and has since led Mayor Di Blasio to put in place tighter City regulations and has caused an investigation by the Manhattan District Attorney’s office.  The investigation is set to determine whether high winds, mechanical error or human error played into the collapse of the two hundred yard tall crane.  Like many people assumed, initial experts are claiming that the accident was a combination of human error and high winds.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Most lawyers are well aware that when a motion in decided in their clients favor they have an obligation to serve that order on opposing counsel with notice of entry.  “Where the rights of a party are or may be affected by an order, the successful moving party, in order to give validity to the order, is required to serve it on the adverse party” ( McCormick v Mars Assoc., 25 A.D.2d 433).  Moreover, “[T]he party prevailing on the motion shall file the order and the papers used on the motion with the proper clerk after receiving them. If a party fails to file any papers required to be filed under this subdivision, the order may be vacated as irregular, with costs.”  CPLR § 2220(a).  So what are the ramifications of failing to serve your adversary with the Court’s decision?  In some instances the consequences may be dire.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

In New York under CPLR 205(a) a plaintiff is given six months to re-file a complaint if there complaint is dismissed against MTA for failure to comply with the 30-day demand requirement set forth in Public Authorities Law 1276(1) and (6).  The Second Department unequivocally held in Fleming v. Long Island Railroad, 130 A.D.2d 59 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep’t 1987) that a dismissal of a complaint pursuant to plaintiff’s failure to comply with the 30-day demand requirement set forth in Public Authorities Law § 1276(1) and (6) does not bar a plaintiff from re-serving a new complaint under CPLR § 304(a) which complies with the condition precedent set forth in the Public Authorities Law.   Under CPLR 205(a)  when an action that has been timely commenced and is later dismissed, a new action may be commenced within six months of the termination, so long as the dismissal was not (1) by voluntary discontinuance, (2) for neglect to prosecute the action, or (3) a final judgment upon the merits (see, CPLR 205(a)). In addition, this six-month tolling provision does not apply where there is a lack of personal jurisdiction in the prior. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Under a normal conditions a pedestrian has the right of way while crossing the street if the cross in a designated crosswalk.  If there is no traffic control device a pedestrian has the right of way while crossing the street in a designated crosswalk.  But what if there is a vehicle blocking the crosswalk?

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Some of the most catastrophic injuries that a human can suffer come as a result of something as simple as crossing the street.  Millions of New Yorkers cross busy city streets as pedestrian’s everyday on their way to work, school, etc.  Few people think about what their rights are as pedestrians if they were to be hit by a motor vehicle while crossing the street.  The following is a very brief legal synopsis of what your rights and duties are as a pedestrian while crossing the street in New York.  Please do not use this post as an all-encompassing report on the law, if you are injured please contact an attorney immediately to assess your rights and the potential for legal action.

Continue reading →