Granat v. Bochner
Jeanette Granat v. Dan Z. Bochner
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered December 14, 1998, dismissing the complaint, and bringing up for review an order, same court and Justice, entered January 13, 1998, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from the aforesaid January 13, 1998 order, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the ensuing judgment.
The court properly dismissed the complaint based on plaintiffs failure to establish that defendants had transacted business within the State, subjecting them to jurisdiction under CPLR 302 (a) (1). Contrary to plaintiffs argument, sending faxes and making phone calls to this State are not, without more, activities tantamount to “transacting business” within the meaning of the aforecited long-arm statute. Nor was plaintiff entitled to additional discovery on the jurisdictional issue since she failed to come forward with tangible evidence sufficing to demonstrate that long-arm jurisdiction over defendants may exist (see, Mandel v Busch Entertainment Corp., 215 AD2d 455 ). Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(concluding that sending faxes and making telephone calls, without more, did not qualify as transacting business)
Cited by 9 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.