We agree with the motion court that there was a sufficient showing that defendant engaged in purposeful business activity within the State to subject it to the jurisdiction of New York courts in this action (see, CPLR 302 [a] [1]; Reiner & Co. v Schwartz,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
LONDON v. VERSUS TECHNOLOGY, INC.
256 A.D.2d 183 (1998)
683 N.Y.S.2d 12
THEODORE LONDON, on Behalf of Himself and Others Similarly Situated, Respondent, v. VERSUS TECHNOLOGY, INC., Appellant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided December 22, 1998.
Decided December 22, 1998.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.