Am. Bank Note Corp. v. Daniele
| Decision Date | 15 February 2011 |
| Citation | 81 A.D.3d 500,916 N.Y.S.2d 112 |
| Parties | AMERICAN BANK NOTE CORPORATION, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Hernan Daniel DANIELE, et al., Defendants-Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Andrews Kurth LLP, New York (Cassandra L. Porsch of counsel), for appellants.
Bernard D'Orazio & Associates, P.C., New York (Bernard D'Orazio of counsel), for respondents.
ANDRIAS, J.P., SAXE, MOSKOWITZ, ACOSTA, FREEDMAN, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Steven E. Liebman, Special Referee), entered July 1, 2009, which, in an action for breach of fiduciary duty, granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
The Special Referee properly dismissed the complaint on the ground that plaintiffs failed to meet their burden of showing the existence of long-arm jurisdiction (CPLR 302[a] ) over defendants, citizens and residents of Argentina ( see Stewart v. Volkswagen of Am., 81 N.Y.2d 203, 207, 597 N.Y.S.2d 612, 613 N.E.2d 518 [1993] ). There is no evidence that any of the allegedly diverted funds were deposited into any bank account in New York in which defendants had an interest. Rather, it appears that the deposits were all made in Argentine branches of New York banks ( see generally Kreutter v. McFadden Oil Corp., 71 N.Y.2d 460, 467, 527 N.Y.S.2d 195, 522 N.E.2d 40 [1988]; cf. Pramer S.C.A. v. Abaplus Intl. Corp., 76 A.D.3d 89, 96, 907 N.Y.S.2d 154 [2010] ). Further, the bank records in the record on appeal strongly tend to refute that deposits into the accounts in question were the product of a fraudulent scheme.
Finally, there was no error in permitting defendants to testify at the hearing by means of a live video conference link from Argentina. First, the court quashed the subpoena plaintiffs had originally served on defendants and plaintiffs did not challenge this ruling on appeal. Thus, defendants' appearance via video conference was voluntary. Further, plaintiffs fully participated in that hearing.
Pursuant to CPLR 3103(a), the court may regulate "any disclosure device" in order to "prevent unreasonable annoyance, expense, embarrassment, disadvantage or other prejudice ..." The decision to allow a party or witness to testify via video conference link is left to a trial court's discretion ( People v. Wrotten, 14 N.Y.3d 33, 37-38, 896 N.Y.S.2d 711, 923 N.E.2d 1099 [2009] cert. denied --- U.S. ----, 130 S.Ct. 2520, 177 L.Ed.2d 316 [2010] ).
Here, de...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gabriel v. Johnston's L.P.
...643, 427 N.Y.S.2d 751, 404 N.E.2d 1293,rearg. denied50 N.Y.2d 1059, 431 N.Y.S.2d 1031, 410 N.E.2d 760;see American Bank Note Corp. v. Daniele, 81 A.D.3d 500, 501, 916 N.Y.S.2d 112). Taking into account “ ‘the law's preference for oral testimony in open court’ ” ( Dailey, 306 A.D.2d at 815, ......
-
People v. Moran
... ... signed the written waiver in open [930 N.Y.S.2d 355] court, we note that the waiver form, which was signed by defendant, defense counsel, and ... ...
-
Gomez v. RJRH Park LLC
...appearance is simply "not feasible as a practical matter" (Matter of Singh, 22 Misc.3d 388, 290 [Sup Ct Bronx Co 2009]; see Daniele, 81 A.D.3d at 502). To that end, deponent seeking to change the presumptive venue or medium of a deposition must show good-faith reasonable efforts to overcome......
-
Gomez v. RJRH Park LLC
...appearance is simply "not feasible as a practical matter" (Matter of Singh, 22 Misc.3d 388, 290 [Sup Ct Bronx Co 2009]; see Daniele, 81 A.D.3d at 502). To that end, deponent seeking to change the presumptive venue or medium of a deposition must show good-faith reasonable efforts to overcome......
-
Table of cases
...Corp. v. DLJ Mortgage Capital, Inc. , 92 A.D.3d 451, 939 N.Y.S.2d 333 (1st Dept. 2012), § 7:80 American Bank Note Corp. v. Daniele , 81 A.D.3d 500, 916 N.Y.S.2d 112 (1st Dept. 2011), § 15:10 American Linen Supply Co. v. M.W.S. Enterprises, Inc., 6 A.D.3d 1079,776 N.Y.S.2d 387 (4th Dept. 200......
-
Witness examination
...a live video conference link from Argentina, where there was evidence of difficulty in traveling. American Bank Note Corp. v. Daniele , 81 A.D.3d 500, 916 N.Y.S.2d 112 (1st Dept. 2011). The court did not abuse its discretion by precluding defendant’s arson expert from testifying via closed-......
-
Witness examination
...of a live video conference link from Argentina, where there was evidence of diiculty in traveling. American Bank Note Corp. v. Daniele , 81 A.D.3d 500, 916 N.Y.S.2d 112 (1st Dept. 2011). he court did not abuse its discretion by precluding defendant’s arson expert from testifying via closed-......
-
Witness examination
...of a live video conference link from Argentina, where there was evidence of diiculty in traveling. American Bank Note Corp. v. Daniele , 81 A.D.3d 500, 916 N.Y.S.2d 112 (1st Dept. 2011). he court did not abuse its discretion by precluding defendant’s arson expert from testifying via closed-......