Commercial Division Blog: Current Developments in the Commercial Divisions of the New York State Courts

On May 14, 2025, Justice Joel M. Cohen granted a motion to dismiss an action brought by a plaintiff who contracted to assist the defendant company with securing PPE manufactured in China that was later resold to New York City. In David Zeng v. HH Fairchild Holdings, LLC, et al., Index No. 651864/2024, the plaintiff sued for breach of contract, but the Court ruled that it lacked long-arm jurisdiction over the defendant, despite the defendant’s sale of PPE to New York City, because that sale lacked a sufficient nexus with the plaintiff’s cause of action. The Court explained: Read More

On January 28, 2025, the Chief Administrative Judge of the Courts signed an administrative order amending the criteria for Commercial Division cases and requiring cases seeking equitable or declaratory relief to also satisfy the monetary threshold (in Manhattan, $500,000) to be in the Commercial Division. Under the prior version of this rule, the monetary threshold did not have to be met for cases seeking only equitable or declaratory relief, and so the only requirement for this type of case to qualify for the Commercial Division was that it was a commercial case (as described in the enumerated list of commercial cases in the Commercial Division Rules). But under the amended rule, which becomes effective March 31, 2025, cases seeking equitable or declaratory relief are no longer exempted from the monetary threshold. And to determine whether this threshold is met, the court will look at the "value of the object of the action," which will be determined by the "value of the suit's intended benefit, the value of the right being protected, or the value of the injury being averted, whichever is greatest." Read More

On October 15, 2024, Justice Margaret A. Chan denied plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint and dismissed the action after finding that the return date on the motion had occurred before the defendants’ time to respond elapsed. In Starship Holdings, LLC, et al., v. Maxben Holdings, LLC, et al., Index No. 651427/2024, the plaintiffs initially commenced an action for repayment on a loan agreement and note by summons and notice. The summons and notice were served on defendants on March 21, 2024. Plaintiffs also filed a notice of motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint, setting a return date of April 9, 2024. As a result, the return date of the motion occurred only 19 days after service was completed on defendants—before the time either defendant was required to respond. Read More

On September 3, 2024, Justice Joel M. Cohen granted defendants’ motion to dismiss, for want of personal jurisdiction, an action seeking damages for the allegedly wrongful overseas seizure of plaintiff’s maritime vessel, the Auzonia. The case is Amelia Maritime Group Ltd. v. Integr8 Fuels America LLC et al., Index No. 152882/2024. Read More

On January 26, 2024, Justice Melissa A. Crane denied defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack or jurisdiction. The decision in Bochenek v. Ashton, Index No. 654904/2022, concerned defendant Twenty Seven Investment Group, LLC (“TSIG”). As to jurisdiction over TSIG, the Court explained: Read More

In an Amended Decision and Order, dated October 24, 2023, in Riverdale Jewish Center v. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., Index No. 651032/2022, Justice Margaret A. Chan granted Defendant ConEd’s motion to dismiss claims against it for deceptive business practices and affirmative misrepresentation based on allegedly misleading billing inserts. Public utility company ConEd provides gas and electric services to many areas of New York State. The Court ruled that New York’s Public Service Commission had direct regulatory jurisdiction over ConEd’s billing inserts and, therefore, the Court should defer to the agency, rejecting the Plaintiff’s arguments that the question of whether an insert was deceptive fell within the Court’s, not the agency’s, expertise. The Court explained: Read More

In an Opinion, dated October 25, 2022, in Cortlandt St. Recovery Corp. v. TPG Capital Mgt., L.P., Index Number 65117618/2017, Justice Robert R. Reed granted, inter alia, individual defendants’ motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.  Plaintiff had brought the action regarding promissory notes known as “floating rate subordinated notes due 2015” issued by a nonparty shell company.  The Court rejected Cortlandt’s argument that it had jurisdiction over the individuals under an alter ego theory and the closely-related doctrine.  The Court explained:  Read More

On August 3, 2022, in Chaar v. Arab Bank P.L.C., Index No. 651780/2022, Justice Margaret Chan of the New York County Commercial Division denied plaintiffs’ motion to confirm a prior order of attachment for lack of quasi-in-rem jurisdiction. While plaintiffs asserted various activities by the defendant banks and their executive and board members in New York, including conducting banking activities, trading on the New York Stock Exchange and investing in real estate, those activities were not sufficiently related to plaintiffs’ claims to establish the constitutionally mandated minimum contacts. Read More

On July 26, 2021, Justice Platkin of the Albany County Commercial Division issued a decision in Meri… Read More

On May 13, 2021, Justice Cohen of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Malae… Read More

On February 25, 2021, the First Department issued a decision in USA Sevens LLC v. World Rugby Ltd., … Read More

On December 17, 2020, Justice Sherwood of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision … Read More

On December 9, 2020, the Second Department issued a decision in New York Ind. Contrs. Alliance, Inc.… Read More

On August 24, 2020, Justice Ostrager of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in… Read More

On July 15, 2020, Justice Masley of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Set… Read More

On July 1, 2020, Justice Cohen of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in J.G. … Read More

On May 27, 2020, the Second Department issued a decision in Yellowbook, Inc. v. Hedge, 2020 NY Slip … Read More

On April 9, 2020, Justice Sherwood of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in A… Read More

On March 3, 2020, the First Department issued a decision in Favourite Ltd. v. Cico, 2020 NY Slip Op.… Read More

On January 6, 2020, Justice Schecter of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in… Read More