Hello! For today’s Civ Pro class, please read this Appellate Division, Second Department decision in Leuthner v. Homewood Suites addressing NY’s Long Arm Jurisdiction. It’s not easy! But try your best to get the gist of it. Before 1pm Friday, please reply to this post with a thoughtful reaction, question, something you found interesting, something you didn’t understand, etc. — that shows that you read and thought about the case! We’ll discuss it in Friday’s Civ Pro class.
Cheers,
Prof. C.
After reading this case, what I understand is that the plaintiffs was failed and unable to prove defendants guilty. Because plaintiffs didn’t really have any evidence that prove that defendants Virginia’s business in not related to New York State’s hotel business at all. But one think I didn’t really get like what they meant by prima facie?
Thanks Amatul! You did a respectable job understanding this decision, it was challenging. I hope today’s discussion clarified your understanding, including about prima facie? If not, I’m happy to review with you. Terrific participation today, as usual!
Prof. C.
After reading the case I realize that a case that goes into our court it’s not Like a normal reading English. I read this case many times and then I understand what it says. As it stays in the case that Leuthner got injuries in a hotel while taking shower in Virginia. A question that I have is the hotel is in Virginia however why the Homewood suites fought the case in Queens county? Why not in virgins? In addition, the case does not prove Homewood suites guilty.
Thanks Mian! Yes, court decisions are challenging to read, you’ll get used to them but I still find them confusing sometimes. You did a great job understanding the key points of this case. I hope our discussion provided further clarification. Terrific participation today!
Prof. C.
After reading this case, it really makes me question why people even let cases get to the point of court if they know for sure they’ll end up looking lost whenever evidence is asked for. Really, what’s the point of wasting all that time? Also, I’m not quite sure I fully understood the case. In my opinion, I feel the case could’ve also been written in more clarity as I didn’t fully understood it and had to re-read a few times.
Thanks Tevin! Wow you sure take a cynical view of civil litigation. 🙂 Yes, court decisions are challenging to read, you’ll get used to them but I still find them confusing sometimes.
After reading this case, I am left with confusion because I thought that when they are in the same jurisdiction they can be trial even before they move out of that jurisdiction. I think it is also unfair for the case to be dismissed just like that when the incident happen before the defendant moved. I do not know I think this case overall Is kinda confusing to me.
Thanks Daziah! I hope today’s class discussion clarified your understanding of the case. If not, I’m happy to talk through it with you.
Prof. C.
This case was about a plaintiff Kurt Leuthner who got injuries in a shower being a guest in a hotel named Homewood Suite appealing against Homewood Suites by Hilton. Not sure if I’m right, but I think Leuthner lost the case because he could not prove personal jurisdiction on behalf of the hotel. No evidence that any business is being done here in New York from the hotel since they are non domiciliaries and other requirements for personal jurisdiction to be granted. If I’m right I have a question why not sue in Virginia? Why here In Queens County?
Carmen, you are EXACTLY right! You have a knack for interpreting court decisions, that will be REALLY helpful going forward in our program. I don’t know the answers to your questions, there are many possible reasons Leuthner chose to sue in Queens, like that he lives there so it’s convenient.
After reading the Leuthner v. Homewood Suites I am very confused on the structure of how it is written. All I truly understand about the case is that the plaintiff was injured while taking a shower in Homewood Suites and it was located in Virginia, but the case took place in Queens County.
Thanks Zainab! Yes, court decisions are challenging to read, you’ll get used to them but sometimes they can still be confusing. Great job figuring out the key elements of the story! I’m sorry you missed today’s class discussion, I expect it would have provided some further clarification. Why don’t you talk with some of your classmates about it?
Prof. C.
After this case my eyes started to burn due to the confusion that i had while reading this but based off my conclusion i believe that Leuthner v. Homewood Suites was a lost one because the plaintiff couldn’t show evidence for anything regarding the case. And it didn’t really make sense to me when the injury happend in Virginia and the case was taken place in Queens County.
Thanks Esther! Yes, court decisions are challenging to read, you’ll get used to them but sometimes they can still be confusing. You did a great job figuring out the basic story here! I’m sorry you missed today’s class discussion, I expect it would have provided some further clarification. Why don’t you talk with some of your classmates about it?
Prof. C.
After reading the case it appears that there was an injury that occurred while the individual was taking a shower. That seems to be the main purpose of the case, however the formatting is very confusing from my point of view. That was what stuck out to me the most.
Thanks Hasani! Yes, court decisions are challenging to read, you’ll get used to them but sometimes they can still be confusing. I’m sorry you missed today’s class discussion, I expect it would have provided some clarification. Why don’t you talk with some of your classmates about it?
Prof. C.
After reading the case, one thing that I want to know is the type of injury Leuthner sustained in the shower. If he suffered an injury in the shower, why is he suing Homewood Suites? Did the ceiling collapse on top of him, or did the shower head fall on his head? If he slipped and fell in the shower, that would be his fault. That isn’t a strong basis to sue a hotel if you were the cause of said injury. He fell and it happened to be in a hotel. There was no reason to file a lawsuit other than the fact that the plaintiff wanted a huge payday.
Thanks Ninmah! You raise important questions. I hope today’s discussion clarified them for you, otherwise I’m happy to talk through them.
Prof. C.
While reading this case, I was confused on why the plaintiff was the one who had to show proof of the defendant businesses in NY, also even though the hotel did business with a New York resident why was that not considered a business transaction within the state ?
Thanks Sherona! You raise great questions. I hope today’s discussion clarified them for you, otherwise I’m happy to talk through them with you.
Prof. C.
Upon reading this case I noticed it was filed because Leuthner
Sustained an injury at the Homewood Suites. What I’m curious about is the type of injury Luethner sustained. Was the injury caused by a malfunction in the hotel? Or had Luethner fallen? I was also interested in the type of evidence that would be needed for this case? Would it be the medical documents? A picture of the injuries? The wording of this case was a little difficult to read as I am not use to reading legal documents, but after reading it several times i was about to get the gist of it.
Thanks Michelle! For someone not used to reading legal documents, you did an admirable job. I hope today’s discussion answered some of your questions, if not, let me know and we can discuss it.
Prof. C.
After reading this cause something p interesting I noticed was that the plaintiff didn’t have enough evidence to prove toward the defendant. Also how this case was brought up to queens county when the incident happen in Virginia.
Thanks Yadira! You hit on two of the key points of this case.
Prof. C.
After reading this case, I am left shocked and a little confused. I am very confused about why there wasn’t a trail before they moved out of that jurisdiction. I am shocked because the plaintiffs were failed and unable to prove the defendants guilty.
Thanks Jennifer! This was a tough case to read, I’m impressed you were able to discern that the plaintiffs didn’t get a chance to prove whether defendants were liable.
Prof. C.