Case Name: Woodhaven Motor Sales, Inc., Plaintiff, v. F & E Granite Memorials, Inc., Defendant
Court: Nassau County District Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1965-05-10
Citations: 46 Misc. 2d 266
Docket Number: 
Parties: Woodhaven Motor Sales, Inc., Plaintiff, v. F & E Granite Memorials, Inc., Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 46
Pages: 266–266

Head Matter:
Woodhaven Motor Sales, Inc., Plaintiff, v. F & E Granite Memorials, Inc., Defendant.
District Court of Nassau County, First District,
May 10, 1965.
Halpern, Halpern $ Axelrod (Maitland M. Axelrod of counsel), for plaintiff. Corso Teitel {Patricia 8. Teitel of counsel), for defendant.

Opinion:
John S. Lockman, J.
The legislative intent in enacting the so-called long-arm statutes (CPLB 302, 313; CCA, § 404; UDCA, § 404) was to confer jurisdiction whenever business was transacted.
While I was surprised to see that the courts have limited the clear intention of the Legislature, I am bound by that limitation. The leading case was decided in this court by a learned Judge. (Home Crafts v. Gramercy Homes, 41 Misc 2d 591 [1964].) There was a telephone call and, as a result of that single communication, merchandise was sent to another county.
This case is distinguished. Here there was a rental extending over a considerable period of time, at least a year; the rented vehicle forming the subject matter was returned to Nassau County for repairs; there was more than a single communication ; there were correspondence and telephone communications. The intention of the Legislature would be frustrated if jurisdiction were not found. Motion to dismiss denied.