New York Team Obtains Personal Jurisdiction Dismissal for Hotel Chain Client

New York, N.Y. (April 2024) - New York Appellate Partner Jim Strauss and Appellate Associate Dean Pillarella recently obtained a pre-answer dismissal on personal jurisdiction grounds for Lewis Brisbois’ hotel chain client in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

The case concerned a slip-and-fall accident at a Jamaica resort, which was said to be affiliated with the firm’s client. Rather than answer the complaint, Dean and Jim filed a pre-answer motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction via Fed. R. Civ. Pro. R. 12(b)(2). In support, they argued that no general jurisdiction existed because the hotel chain was not incorporated in New York, did not have its principal place of business in New York, and was not otherwise “essentially at home” in New York. With respect to specific jurisdiction, they argued that no prong of New York’s long-arm statute, CPLR 302, conferred jurisdiction. With respect to CPLR 302(a)(1), in particular, they argued that, even assuming, arguendo, a transaction of business in New York, the plaintiff’s claim still did not “arise from” such a transaction, as equally required by CPLR 302.

In opposition, the plaintiff alleged that both general and specific jurisdiction lay, given the hotel chain’s operation of numerous hotels in the State of New York. In particular, the plaintiff emphasized that she booked her stay while in New York, through a website affiliated with the hotel chain.

In the court’s memorandum and order, Judge Margo Brodie, Chief Judge of the Eastern District of New York, agreed with Dean and Jim’s arguments in full and dismissed the plaintiff’s action for lack of personal jurisdiction. In particular, the court stressed, “Assuming without deciding that Defendants have transacted business in New York, Plaintiff has not shown that there is an ‘articulable nexus’ between her negligence claim and any actions taken in New York.”

This matter serves as a reminder that, in tort cases, the mere transaction of business is not enough to secure specific personal jurisdiction in New York. Rather, CPLR 302 additionally requires that the plaintiff’s claim “arise from” that transaction. As found by Judge Brodie, here, the plaintiff’s claim arose from alleged safe premises in Jamaica, rather than any transaction of business in New York.