B & M Kingstone, LLC v. Mega Int’l Commercial Bank Co – Case Brief Summary (New York)

In B & M Kingstone, LLC v Mega Int'l Commercial Bank Co., 131 AD3d 259, 266 (1st Dept 2015), the Appellate Division, First Department, held that "under Daimler, New York does not have general jurisdiction over Mega's worldwide operations," the Mega International Commercial Bank Company being an international banking corporation, organized under the laws of Taiwan, with its principal place of business located there, and having 128 branches worldwide, only one of which was in New York.

But the court found that there was jurisdiction (as discussed below, apparently not general jurisdiction) to compel compliance with information subpoenas arising from the bank's registration with the Superintendent of the Department of Financial Services and filing of a written instrument appointing the superintendent as an agent for service of process.

"Mega consented to the necessary regulatory oversight in return for permission to operate in New York, and therefore is subject to jurisdiction requiring it to comply with the appropriate Information Subpoenas ." (B & M Kingstone, LLC v. Mega Int'l Commercial Bank Co., supra, 265.)

In B & M Kingstone, LLC v. Mega Int'l Commercial Bank Co. (supra), the appellate court relied on Banking Law §200 which provides in substance that, inter alia, no foreign banking corporation shall conduct business in this state unless it filed with the Superintendent of Banking a written instrument appointing him as its agent "upon whom all process in any action or proceeding against it on a cause of action arising out of a transaction with its New York agency or agencies or branch or branches, may be served with the same force and effect as if it were a domestic corporation and had been lawfully served with process within the state."