Ying Jun Chen v. Lei Shi, 2004-07059.
Decision Date | 06 June 2005 |
Docket Number | 2004-07059. |
Citation | 2005 NY Slip Op 04572,19 A.D.3d 407,796 N.Y.S.2d 126 |
Parties | YING JUN CHEN et al., Respondents, v. LEI SHI et al., Appellants. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiffs.
The Supreme Court correctly denied that branch of the motion which was to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant Kenny Ly for lack of personal jurisdiction. As the parties seeking to assert personal jurisdiction, the plaintiffs bore the burden of proof on this issue (see Brandt v Toraby, 273 AD2d 429, 430 [2000]; Roldan v Dexter Folder Co., 178 AD2d 589, 590 [1991]; Spectra Prods. v Indian Riv. Citrus Specialties, 144 AD2d 832, 833 [1988]). That burden, however does not entail making a prima facie showing of personal jurisdiction; rather, the plaintiffs need only demonstrate that facts "may exist" to exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant (Peterson v Spartan Indus., 33 NY2d 463, 467 [1974]; see Amigo Foods Corp. v Marine Midland Bank-N.Y., 39 NY2d 391, 395 [1976]; Cordero v City of New York, 236 AD2d 577, 578 [1997]). The plaintiffs established that facts "may exist" to exercise personal jurisdiction over Ly and have made a "sufficient start" to warrant further discovery on the issue of personal jurisdiction over him (Peterson v Spartan Indus., supra; see Longview Fibre Co. v Triple R Indus., 188 AD2d 983, 984 [1992]), which, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (d), is within the court's discretion to grant. Accordingly, we modify the order appealed from to allow renewal of the motion upon completion of disclosure on the issue of personal jurisdiction over Ly.
We note that to...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Chen v. Guo Liang Lu
...” (Daniel B. Katz & Assoc. Corp. v. Midland Rushmore, LLC, 90 A.D.3d 977, 978, 937 N.Y.S.2d 236, quoting Ying Jun Chen v. Lei Shi, 19 A.D.3d 407, 407–408, 796 N.Y.S.2d 126 ; see Goel v. Ramachandran, 111 A.D.3d at 788, 975 N.Y.S.2d 428 ). If it appears “that facts essential to justify oppos......
-
Deer Consumer Prods., Inc. v. Little
...defendant ( see American BankNote Corp. v. Daniele, 45 A.D.3d 338, 340, 845 N.Y.S.2d 266 [1st Dept. 2007]; Ying Jun Chen v. Lei Shi, 19 A.D.3d 407, 796 N.Y.S.2d 126 [2d Dept. 2005]; CPLR § 3211[d] ). And, to the extent that, in opposition to a motion to dismiss, the plaintiff seeks disclosu......
-
Hala v. Orange Reg'l Med. Ctr.
...151 A.D.3d 1042, 1043, 58 N.Y.S.3d 437 ; Castillo v. Star Leasing Co., 69 A.D.3d 551, 551, 893 N.Y.S.2d 123 ; Ying Jun Chen v. Lei Shi, 19 A.D.3d 407, 407, 796 N.Y.S.2d 126 ), have not pointed to any connection between the State of South Carolina and the plaintiffs or the plaintiffs' medica......
-
798 Tremont Holding LLC v. Wefile LLC
... ... plaintiff as the party asserting jurisdiction."]; ... Ying Jun Chen v Lei Shi , 19 A.D.3d 407, 407 [2d Dept ... 2005]; Brandt v ... ...