M. Katz & Son Billiard Products, Inc. v. G. Correale & Sons, Inc.
| Decision Date | 29 November 1967 |
| Citation | 232 N.E.2d 864,20 N.Y.2d 903,285 N.Y.S.2d 871 |
| Parties | , 232 N.E.2d 864 M. KATZ & SON BILLIARD PRODUCTS, INC., Appellant, v. G. CORREALE & SONS, INC., Respondent. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 26 A.D.2d 52, 270 N.Y.S.2d 672.
Harawitz & Harawitz, New York City (Benjamin H. Siff and Howard L. Harawitz, New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff-appellant.
William G. Wall, New York City (Abbie Goldstein, New York City, of counsel), for defendant-respondent.
Plaintiff, a corporation engaged in the manufacture of billiard equipment and having its place of business in New York City, sought to recover from defendant, a New Jersey corporation, $970.70, the price which defendant had agreed to pay for a quantity of billiard cues and triangles sold to defendant by plaintiff. Plaintiff alleged that it and defendant had engaged in business transactions with each other for 30 years, and that on November 13, 1962, in accordance with their practice, defendant's president had placed a telephone order for the billiard cues and triangles, and that plaintiff shipped the order to the defendant's place of business in New Jersey by common carrier f.o.b. plaintiff's factory in New York City, and that defendant's president, after receiving the goods, requested credits totaling $66 for the return of some of the billiard cues delivered to defendant, and that such credits were granted but that defendant never paid the balance of $904.70 due on the shipment.
The answer of the defendant contained an affirmative defense of lack of jurisdiction over its person and a counterclaim for $250 in damages allegedly sustained by reason of defective condition of the billiard cues shipped to it. The New York City Civil Court Act, § 404, subd. a, provided that 'The court may exercise personal jurisdiction over any non-resident of the city of New York * * * as to a cause of action arising from any of the acts enumerated in this section * * * if, in person or through an agent, he: 1. transacts any business within the city of New York'.
The Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County, Alexander Salottolo, J., entered a judgment for the plaintiff on an order which denied a motion by the defendant for summary judgment and granted a cross motion by plaintiff for summary judgment.
The Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Judicial Department, affirmed the judgment of the Civil Court.
The Appellate Division entered an...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Beacon Enterprises, Inc. v. Menzies
...defendant's communication from another locale with a party in New York. See Katz & Son Billiard Products, Inc. v. Correale & Sons, Inc., 20 N.Y.2d 903, 904, 285 N.Y.S.2d 871, 871-72, 232 N.E.2d 864, 865 (1967); L.F. Rothschild, Unterberg, Towbin v. McTamney, 89 A.D.2d 540, 540-41, 452 N.Y.S......
-
Fischbarg v. Doucet
...Galleries v. Franklyn, 26 N.Y.2d 13, 17, 308 N.Y.S.2d 337, 256 N.E.2d 506 [1970], citing M. Katz & Son Billiard Prods. v. Correale & Sons, 20 N.Y.2d 903, 285 N.Y.S.2d 871, 232 N.E.2d 864 [1967]), the transitory presence of a corporate official here (see McKee, 20 N.Y.2d at 382, 283 N.Y.S.2d......
-
Carrolton Associates v. Abrams
...sufficient to give our courts jurisdiction over it. Jurisdiction was declined also in M. Katz & Son Billiard Products, Inc. v. G. Correale & Sons, Inc., 20 N.Y.2d 903, 285 N.Y.S.2d 871, 232 N.E.2d 864, where defendant in New Jersey placed orders by telephone with plaintiff in New York, and ......
-
Schneider Corp. of America v. R. W. Borrowdale Co., Inc., 79-2241
...In M. Katz & Son Billiard Products, Inc. v. G. Correale & Sons, Inc. (1966), 26 A.D.2d 52, 270 N.Y.S.2d 672, aff'd, 20 N.Y.2d 903, 285 N.Y.S.2d 871, 232 N.E.2d 864, defendant in New Jersey phoned plaintiff in New York to order certain goods which were shipped to defendant. Some of the goods......