Fried v. Lakeland Hide & Leather Co.
| Decision Date | 07 November 1956 |
| Parties | Ad FRIED, doing business as Ad Fried Leather Co., Plaintiff, v. LAKELAND HIDE & LEATHER CO., Inc., Defendant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
Samuel Shapiro, New York City, for plaintiff.
Chester L. Hirsch, New York City, appearing specially for the purpose of this motion, for defendant.
Defendant appearing specially moves to set aside service of process and to dismiss this action upon the ground that this court has no jurisdiction over the defendant for the reason that it is a foreign corporation not doing business within this state. The service in question was made upon one Walter Kramer claimed to be defendant's New York agent and also as managing agent of Eagle Flagg Tanning Corp., also described as defendant's New York agent.
In support of the application, defendant asserts, in substance, that: it has no certificate authorizing it to do business here; it is a Florida corporation engaged in the leather tanning business having its factory, offices and sole place of business in Lakeland, Florida; it maintains no place of business whatsoever in this state and none of its officers, directors, agents, servants or employees are in New York State; it has no mailing or telephone listing or arrangements of any kind whatsoever in this state; it manufactures in Florida and ships nationwide; in the past year shipments were made to ten or fifteen states including New York but that 'only a small percentage' of sales were made here; the New York sales were made through the solicitation of individuals who receive commissions for any sales so made; all such orders and sales must first be accepted by defendant in Florida; all shipments are made and all bills and invoices are sent from Florida and payments are made to its offices in that state; no person in New York is in any way authorized to act as agent or servant of defendant or to bind it to ship merchandise or to engage in any other transaction; none of its bills or invoice forms indicate any New York office or agent authorized to act for it.
Defendant further alleges that: the person served does solicit business for it but merely upon a commission basis to be paid when his orders or sales are accepted by defendant in Florida; defendant has the right to reject or refuse such orders or sales; Kramer has no authority to in any way bind defendant to make sales or to do anything else.
Walter Kramer, the alleged agent and Eagle Flagg Tanning Corp. by affidavit, corroborate all statements respecting their relationship with defendant, in effect, stating that each carries on an independent business and denying that they act in any way for defendant except from the standpoint of selling upon a commission basis as described in defendant's affidavit.
Plaintiff, in opposition, in effect categorically denies the truth of the statements made by defendant and Kramer but sets forth no real facts pertaining to the actual relationship between defendant and Kramer or Eagle Flagg Tanning Corp. except a purported oral statement alleged to have been made by defendant's president to him in or about November 4, 1955 to the effect that 'the defendant had engaged Eagle Flagg Tanning Corp. or Walter...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
H. Heller & Co., Inc. v. Novacor Chemicals Ltd.
...corporation. See, e.g., Cohen v. Vaughan Bassett Furniture Co., 495 F.Supp. 849 (S.D.N.Y.1980); Fried v. Lakeland Hide & Leather Co., 14 Misc.2d 208, 157 N.Y.S.2d 633 (Sup.Ct.1956); Knapp v. Roberton Manufacturing Co., 155 N.Y. S.2d 490, 493 (Sup.Ct.1956). A foreign manufacturer's transacti......
-
Shawe v. Wendy Wilson, Inc.
...of acting for similarly situated primary sellers, the New York courts disclaim jurisdiction. Fried v. Lakeland Hide & Leather Co., Sup.Ct., Sp.Term, N.Y.County, 14 Misc.2d 208, 157 N.Y.S. 2d 633; Gertenstein v. Peninsular, etc., Navigation Co., City Court, Special Term, New York County, 202......
-
Cohen v. Vaughan Bassett Furniture Co., Inc.
...performed by Rosenberg are insufficient to establish the jurisdictional presence of a foreign corporation. In Fried v. Lakeland Hide & Leather Co., 14 Misc.2d 208, 157 N.Y.S.2d 633 (Sup.Ct. Bronx Co. 1956), for example, representatives in New York solicited orders for a Florida corporation,......
-
Fried v. Lakeland Hide & Leather Co.
...that there was no proof that the person served was, as claimed by the plaintiff, the managing agent of the defendant corporation. (see 157 N.Y.S.2d 633). In the instant action, service was made upon the defendant's president--thus eliminating the second and third bases for Judge Di Falco's ......