SUNG HWAN CO., LTD., plf-app v. RITE AID CORPORATION, def-res

112444/01. SUNG HWAN CO., LTD., plf-app v. RITE AID CORPORATION, def-res — Herzfeld & Rubin, P.C., New York (David B. Hamm of counsel), for ap — Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, New York (Stephen Scotch-Marmo and Elizabeth Buechner of counsel), Thomas A. Schmutz, Washington, D.C., of the bar of the District of Columbia, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel, and Michael F. Healy, Washington, D.C., of the bar of the District of Columbia, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel, for res — Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered March 2, 2015, after a nonjury trial, dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

112444/01. SUNG HWAN CO., LTD., plf-app v. RITE AID CORPORATION, def-res — Herzfeld & Rubin, P.C., New York (David B. Hamm of counsel), for ap — Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, New York (Stephen Scotch-Marmo and Elizabeth Buechner of counsel), Thomas A. Schmutz, Washington, D.C., of the bar of the District of Columbia, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel, and Michael F. Healy, Washington, D.C., of the bar of the District of Columbia, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel, for res — Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered March 2, 2015, after a nonjury trial, dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this action pursuant to CPLR article 53 to enforce a foreign money judgment, plaintiff had the burden of establishing jurisdiction (Venegas v. Capric Clinic, __ NY3d __, 2017 NY Slip Op 00936 [1st Dept 2017]; Derso v. Volkswagen of Am., 159 AD2d 937, 938 [4th Dept 1990]). On the record before us, we cannot conclude that Supreme Court erred in determining that plaintiff failed to do so. Specifically at issue was whether defendant operated or controlled an ice cream factory owned by a subsidiary that allegedly supplied listeria-tainted ice cream to plaintiff in South Korea. The record does not support a conclusion that Supreme Court erred in determining that defendant did not operate or control the ice cream factory directly or through a subsidiary acting as a “department” of defendant (see Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 751 F2d 117, 120 [2d Cir 1984]). Moreover, neither could apparent authority give rise to jurisdiction over defendant here.

SUNG HWAN CO., LTD., plf-app v. RITE AID CORPORATION, def-res

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal