Case ID: ny-2d_43/html/0916-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Mollendo Equipment Co., Inc., Appellant, v Sekisan Trading Co., Ltd., Respondent.
    Submitted January 11, 1978;
    decided February 16, 1978
    
      APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      Louis C. Jones and Nicholas M. Cherot for appellant.
    
      Benjamin E. Haller and John P. Love for respondent.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order affirmed, with costs. As the pleadings and affidavits were framed, the Appellate Division was entitled to find, as it did, that New York is an inconvenient forum for this litigation. It would also have been entitled to find otherwise, especially since any forum would have been inconvenient for court and parties. But the Appellate Division has been granted considerable discretion in this area, and, on the record made by the parties, it cannot be said that the discretion was abused as a matter of law (Irrigation & Ind. Dev. Corp. v IndagS. A., 37 NY2d 522, 525).

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.