Matter of OxyContin II
Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department
September 21, 2010, Decided
[*1019] [**241] In actions to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., which were joined for discovery, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Maltese, J.), dated February 10, 2009, which denied their motion [***2] pursuant to CPLR 327 (a) to dismiss the complaints of those plaintiffs who reside outside of New York State on the ground of forum non conveniens.
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, on the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, with costs, and the defendants' motion pursuant to CPLR 327 (a) to dismiss the complaints of the plaintiffs who reside outside of New York State is granted on condition that the defendants stipulate (1) that they will accept service of process in newly commenced out-of-state actions upon the same causes of action as those asserted in the instant complaints by the out-of-state plaintiffs; (2) that they will waive any defenses which were not available to them in New York at the time of service upon them of a copy of this decision and order; (3) that each deposition of any of their home-office employees taken by a plaintiff's counsel may be cross-noticed and deemed to be taken in all of the cases of that counsel; and (4) that, in the new forum, they will not raise any objection to having their home-office employees appear for deposition or trial on the ground of venue or location of the lawsuit; the out-of-state plaintiffs' time to commence the new [***3] actions shall [****2] be within 90 [*1020] days after service of the stipulation upon the plaintiffs; and it is further,
Ordered that the defendants' time to stipulate shall be within 30 days after service upon them of a copy of this decision and order; in the event that the defendants fail to so stipulate, then the order is affirmed, with costs.Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
76 A.D.3d 1019 *; 908 N.Y.S.2d 239 **; 2010 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6778 ***; 2010 NY Slip Op 6636 ****
[****1] In the Matter of OxyContin II. Janet Miller et al., Respondents; Purdue Pharma Company et al., Appellants. (Index No. 700000/07)
Prior History: Matter of OxyContin II, 23 Misc. 3d 974, 881 N.Y.S.2d 812, 2009 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 289 (Feb. 10, 2009)
nonresident plaintiff, reside, out-of-state, courts
Civil Procedure, Preliminary Considerations, Venue, Forum Non Conveniens, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Jurisdiction Over Actions, General Overview, Evidence, Burdens of Proof, Allocation, Federal & State Interrelationships, Choice of Law