Cruz v. Miller UK Ltd. ( 2023 )

Cruz v Miller UK Ltd. (2023 NY Slip Op 01739)

Cruz v Miller UK Ltd.

2023 NY Slip Op 01739

Decided on March 30, 2023

Appellate Division, First Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided and Entered: March 30, 2023
Before: Renwick, A.P.J., Gesmer, Singh, González, Scarpulla, JJ.

Index No. 151438/21 Appeal No. 17595 Case No. 2022-02080

[*1]Angel Cruz, Plaintiff-Respondent,

v

Miller UK Ltd., et al., Defendants-Appellants, Komatsu America Corp et al., Defendants.

Littleton Park Joyce Ughetta & Kelly LLP, New York (Michael H. Bai of counsel), for appellants.

Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, LLP, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York (Alexander Tisch, J.), entered on or about November 17, 2021, which denied, without prejudice, defendants Miller UK Ltd., Miller International Ltd. and Miller International Holdings Limited's motion to dismiss the complaint as against them pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(8) for lack of personal jurisdiction, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted as to Miller UK Ltd. and Miller International Ltd. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

This action stems from an accident where a bucket from an excavator detached or decoupled, fell, and struck plaintiff while he was employed as a construction worker at LaGuardia Airport. Based on this same accident plaintiff had commenced another action against the City of New York and other defendants in Bronx County (Index No. 33774/2018) (the other action). The other action was eventually transferred to Queens (Index No. 720914/2021). Miller UK Ltd. (Miller UK), Miller International Ltd. (Miller Intl.), and Miller International Holdings Limited (Miller Holdings) (collectively, the Miller defendants) were joined as third-party defendants in the other action and moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.

For the reasons explained in Cruz v City of New York, 210 AD3d 523 (1st Dept 2022), there is neither general nor specific personal jurisdiction over Miller UK and Miller Intl. (Simmons v Trans Express Inc., 37 NY3d 107, 112 [2021] ["Collateral estoppel prevents "a party from relitigating in a subsequent action or proceeding an issue clearly raised in a prior action or proceeding and decided against that party ... whether or not the ... causes of action are the same"] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Thus, the action is dismissed as against Miller UK and Miller Intl.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: March 30, 2023