Kesterson v. Cambo Fotografische Industrie Bv

Decision Date22 June 2006
Docket Number8884.
Citation819 N.Y.S.2d 222,2006 NY Slip Op 05109,30 A.D.3d 301
PartiesMATTHEW KESTERSON, Respondent, v. CAMBO FOTOGRAFISCHE INDUSTRIE BV, Appellant, and CALUMET PHOTOGRAPHIC, INC., et al., Respondents.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Notwithstanding its burden in the first instance of showing entitlement to summary judgment on jurisdictional grounds, Cambo failed to demonstrate lack of substantial revenue from interstate or international commerce, or an inability reasonably to anticipate that its allegedly tortious acts would have consequences in this state (see CPLR 302 [a] [3] [ii]). Nor did Cambo demonstrate the requisite hardship to warrant a change of venue pursuant to CPLR 327.

Concur — Tom, J.P., Friedman, Sullivan, Catterson and Malone, JJ.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Williams v. Beemiller, Inc.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 9 d5 Fevereiro d5 2018
    ...[3d Dept. 2010] ; Dreznick v. Lenchner, 41 A.D.3d 769, 770, 838 N.Y.S.2d 781 [2d Dept. 2007] ; Kesterson v. Cambo Fotografische Industrie BV, 30 A.D.3d 301, 301, 819 N.Y.S.2d 222 [1st Dept. 2006] ; Schultz v. Hyman, 201 A.D.2d 956, 957–958, 607 N.Y.S.2d 824 [4th Dept. 1994] ). In determinin......
  • In the Matter of Picon v. Johnson
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 22 d4 Junho d4 2006

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