FOREIGN FORUM HAD JURISDICTION OVER PARTIES
When “PILI” attempted to enforce a California judgment against “HIIE,” the latter alleged that the Golden State judgment wasn’t entitled to deference (“full faith and credit”) because that foreign forum didn’t have jurisdiction over the company. When the Kings County Supreme Court denied that request and entered a judgment in the amount of $81,253.10, an appeal followed.
Interestingly, the Appellate Division, Second Department, noted that HIIE had appeared in the California case, and tried to vacate its default (and sought leave to file late answer), but that request had been denied and, on appeal, a California appellate court affirmed that denial.
Given that procedural backdrop, the AD2 was of the view HIIE’s appearance in the California litigation, and the adverse determination that resulted there, precluded a review by the Kings County Supreme Court (on the basis of “res judicata”), and the lower court’s declination to relitigate the underlying issues had been appropriately decided.
Now that was golden. (Have full faith in that?)
# # #
DECISION