Gutfreund v. Russ
| Decision Date | 27 May 1965 |
| Citation | 261 N.Y.S.2d 77,16 N.Y.2d 637,209 N.E.2d 118 |
| Parties | , 209 N.E.2d 118 B. Manuel GUTFREUND, Respondent, v. Henry D. RUSS, Appellant, and Farmer & Hall, Inc., et al., Defendants. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 21 A.D.2d 871, 252 N.Y.S.2d 394.
Action to recover money damages allegedly sustained by plaintiff and his assignor as result of alleged misrepresentations made by individual defendant. The individual defendant resided in New Jersey. His alleged misrepresentation occurred in New York. The individual defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint as against him on the ground that the court did not have jurisdiction over his person.
The Supreme Court, Special Term, William Lyman, J., denied the motion and the individual defendant appealed.
The Appellate Division affirmed the order of Special Term and the individual defendant appealed by permission of the Appellate Division which certified the following question to the Court of Appeals: 'Was the Appellate Division correct in affirming the order of the Supreme Court, New York County entered on February 28, 1964, denying defendant's motion to dismiss the action for lack of jurisdiction?'
Palmer, Serles, Delaney, Shaw & Pomeroy, New York City, (Lawrence Pomeroy, James P. O'Neill, New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
Order affirmed, with costs.
Question certified answered in the affirmative (see Longines-Wittnauer Watch Co. v. Barnes & Reinecke, Inc., 15 N.Y.2d , 261 N.Y.S.2d 8, 209 N.E.2d 68, also decided to-day).
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Frummer v. Hilton Hotels Intern., Inc.
...N.Y.S.2d 8, 209 N.E.2d 68; Lewin v. Bock Laundry Mach, Co., 16 N.Y.2d 1070, 266 N.Y.S.2d 391, 213 N.E.2d 686; Gutfreund v. Russ, 16 N.Y.2d 637, 261 N.Y.S.2d 77, 209 N.E.2d 118.) However, the plaintiff does not allege that he had any dealings at all with the British corporate defendant or it......
-
Public Adm'r of New York County v. Royal Bank of Canada
... ... Bock Laundry Mach. Co., 16 N.Y.2d 1070, 266 N.Y.S.2d 391, 213 N.E.2d 686; Gutfreund v. Russ, 16 N.Y.2d 637, 261 N.Y.S.2d 77, 209 N.E.2d 118.) ... In the case before us, the defendant Royal Bank of Canada has conceded ... ...
-
Wilsey v. Gavett
...applied retroactively. The Court of Appeals has consistently affirmed its retroactive effect on these facts. Gutfreund v. Russ, 16 N.Y.2d 637, 261 N.Y.S.2d 77, 209 N.E.2d 118 (1965); American Cyanamid Company v. Rosenblatt, 16 N.Y.2d 621, 261 N.Y.S.2d 69, 209 N.E.2d 112 (1965); Longines-Wit......
- Rawdin v. Long Island Home, Ltd.