From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Law Research Service, Inc. v. Crook

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 6, 1971
36 A.D.2d 912 (N.Y. App. Div. 1971)

Opinion

May 6, 1971


Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered February 2, 1971, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of dismissing the complaint and severing the action as to defendant Hearne, and otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. The aspects of this appeal in which we affirm the actions taken by Special Term are not discussed. The defendant Hearne was served pursuant to CPLR 302 (subd. [a]) in Texas. His sole connection with the instant matter is that as attorney for defendant Crook he retained a New York attorney to represent his client in the making of a stipulation to be used in an action pending in Texas. This is neither the performance of any act within the State or the transaction of any business here giving jurisdiction pursuant to CPLR 302.

Concur — Stevens, P.J., Nunez, Steuer, Tilzer and Eager, JJ.


Summaries of

Law Research Service, Inc. v. Crook

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 6, 1971
36 A.D.2d 912 (N.Y. App. Div. 1971)
Case details for

Law Research Service, Inc. v. Crook

Case Details

Full title:LAW RESEARCH SERVICE, INC., Appellant-Respondent, v. JOHN H. CROOK et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 6, 1971

Citations

36 A.D.2d 912 (N.Y. App. Div. 1971)

Citing Cases

Reiner v. Durand

New York courts are divided over the question of whether the retainer of an attorney in New York by an out of…

Orlando v. Nxt-ID, Inc.

However, hiring an attorney who happens to be based in New York, but who could have performed the same…