Kefalas v. Kontogiannis

Decision Date02 October 2007
Docket Number2006-02881.
Citation2007 NY Slip Op 07406,44 A.D.3d 624,848 N.Y.S.2d 180
PartiesVASSILOS KEFALAS, Respondent, v. THOMAS KONTOGIANNIS et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On a motion pursuant to CPLR 327 to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens, the burden is on the movant to demonstrate the relevant private or public interest factors which militate against accepting the litigation (see Islamic Republic of Iran v Pahlavi, 62 NY2d 474 [1984], cert denied 469 US 1108 [1985]; Stravalle v Land Cargo, Inc., 39 AD3d 735 [2007]). Among the factors the court must weigh are the residency of the parties, the potential hardship to proposed witnesses, the availability of an alternative forum, the situs of the actionable events, and the burden which will be imposed upon the New York courts, with no one single factor controlling (see Stravalle v Land Cargo, Inc., 39 AD3d at 735). In general, the trial court's determination will not be disturbed on appeal unless the court failed to properly consider all the relevant factors (id.). Here, we find no basis to disturb the Supreme Court's determination.

Moreover, the appellants are guilty of laches. Having participated in the action for more than two years, through voluminous disclosure and the filing of a note of issue, the appellants cannot now claim that New York is an inconvenient forum (see Bock v Rockwell Mfg. Co., 151 AD2d 629 [1989]; Corines v Dobson, 135 AD2d 390 [1987]).

Miller, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Boyle v. Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • October 23, 2013
    ...“ ‘no single factor controlling’ ” (Smolik v. Turner Constr. Co., 48 A.D.3d 452, 453, 851 N.Y.S.2d 616, quoting Kefalas v. Kontogiannis, 44 A.D.3d 624, 625, 848 N.Y.S.2d 180), I find that the absence of a meaningful, viable alternate forum for these plaintiffs to fully and fairly adjudicate......
  • Chang Jin Park v. Cho
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • September 20, 2017
    ...events, and the burden which will be imposed upon the New York courts, with no one single factor controlling" ( Kefalas v. Kontogiannis, 44 A.D.3d 624, 625, 848 N.Y.S.2d 180 ). A court's determination of a motion to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens will not be disturbed on appe......
  • Aiken v. Liotta
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • February 10, 2016
    ...events, and the burden which will be imposed upon the New York courts, with no single factor controlling" (Kefalas v. Kontogiannis, 44 A.D.3d 624, 625, 848 N.Y.S.2d 180 ). A court's determination will not be disturbed on appeal unless that court failed to properly consider all the relevant ......
  • Sikinyi v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • July 1, 2020
    ...events, and the burden which will be imposed upon the New York courts, with no one single factor controlling" ( Kefalas v. Kontogiannis, 44 A.D.3d 624, 625, 848 N.Y.S.2d 180 ). A court's determination of a motion to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens will not be disturbed on appe......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT