Lehigh Valley Industries, Inc., and Lehigh Colonial Corporation, Vsv. Norman Birenbaum, and David Birenbaum

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the fact that the contract was to be performed in another state was “of great[] significance”
• construing the New York long-arm statute’s section on jurisdiction when tortious activity occurs outside the state, CPLR § 302(a)(3), and finding no jurisdiction on this basis.
• affirming the denial of jurisdictional discovery because of “a threshold failure . . . to establish any basis for finding that [the defendant] committed any tortious activity in New York’
• rejecting “bland assertion of conspiracy or agency” as sufficient to sustain personal jurisdiction
• “no abuse of discretion in the denial of discovery” in face of “the bland assertion of conspiracy”
• N.Y.C.P.L.R. § 302(a)(3) “is not satisfied by remote or consequential injuries . . . which occur in New York only because the plaintiff is domiciled or doing business here”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).