Calzaturificio Giuseppe Garbuio v. Dartmouth Outdoor Sports
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
435 F. Supp. 1209 (1977)
Calzaturificio Giuseppe Garbuio S.A.S. (CGG) (plaintiff) was an Italian manufacturer of ski boots. CGG entered into a contract with Dartmouth Outdoor Sports, Inc. (Dartmouth) (defendant), a New Hampshire corporation, for Dartmouth to distribute CGG’s products. The contract provided that New York law was to govern any disputes arising from the contract and that the parties agreed that the contract would be deemed to have been made in New York. In fact, however, the contract was not made in New York. Claiming that Dartmouth owed it almost $73,000, CGG sued Dartmouth in federal court in New York pursuant to the federal court’s diversity jurisdiction. Dartmouth was not subject to personal jurisdiction in New York, but CGG asserted quasi-in-rem personal jurisdiction by attaching certain New York funds that Dartmouth’s successor as CGG’s distributor owed to Dartmouth. Dartmouth moved to vacate the attachment, arguing that New York Business Corporation Law (BCL) § 1314(b) prohibited a non-New York plaintiff from suing a foreign defendant in New York except under limited circumstances. Such circumstances were not present in this case, according to Dartmouth, because, among other things, the contract was not made in New York and the parties could not manufacture New York subject-matter jurisdiction by agreeing that the contract was entered in New York even though the contract actually was made elsewhere. Dartmouth further argued that the clause calling for New York law to govern the contract did not create a sufficient nexus to New York to support subject-matter jurisdiction because that clause addressed only choice of law and did not designate New York as the litigation forum.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (MacMahon, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 710,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 710,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,600 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.