Opinion
1252 CA 19-01354
12-23-2020
Kimberly COLE, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Mark Cole, Deceased, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. SAFETY-KLEEN SYSTEMS, INC., et al., Defendants, and Brenntag Northeast, LLC, Defendant-Appellant.
MONTGOMERY MCCRACKEN WALKER & RHOADS LLP, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA (ALBERT L. PICCERILLI, OF THE PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW JERSEY BARS, ADMITTED PRO HAC VICE, OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. LOCKS LAW FIRM PLLC, NEW YORK CITY (JANET C. WALSH OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.
MONTGOMERY MCCRACKEN WALKER & RHOADS LLP, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA (ALBERT L. PICCERILLI, OF THE PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW JERSEY BARS, ADMITTED PRO HAC VICE, OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
LOCKS LAW FIRM PLLC, NEW YORK CITY (JANET C. WALSH OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, NEMOYER, WINSLOW, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Brenntag Northeast, LLC (defendant) appeals from an order denying its motion to dismiss the third amended complaint against it for lack of personal jurisdiction (see CPLR 3211 [a] [8] ). Defendant's sole contention is that the New York courts cannot constitutionally exercise personal jurisdiction over it because the tortious act allegedly occurred outside New York. We reject that contention. CPLR 302 (a) (3) authorizes personal jurisdiction under certain circumstances in which the tortious act occurs outside New York, and defendant does not dispute plaintiff's assertion that CPLR 302 (a) (3) (ii) applies here. Moreover, it is well established that exercising personal jurisdiction under CPLR 302 (a) (3) will contravene the Federal Constitution only in " ‘rare’ " cases ( D & R Global Selections, S.L. v. Bodega Olegario Falcon Pineiro , 29 N.Y.3d 292, 300, 56 N.Y.S.3d 488, 78 N.E.3d 1172 [2017], quoting Rushaid v. Pictet & Cie , 28 N.Y.3d 316, 331, 45 N.Y.S.3d 276, 68 N.E.3d 1 [2016], rearg denied 28 N.Y.3d 1161, 49 N.Y.S.3d 89, 71 N.E.3d 581 [2017] ; see Williams v. Beemiller, Inc. , 33 N.Y.3d 523, 535, 106 N.Y.S.3d 237, 130 N.E.3d 833 [2019, Feinman, J., concurring] ), and defendant does not argue that it lacks the minimum contacts with New York necessary to satisfy the demands of the Federal Constitution (cf. Williams , 33 N.Y.3d at 527-531, 106 N.Y.S.3d 237, 130 N.E.3d 833 ).