Beltone Electronics Corp. v. SelbstBeltone Electronics Corp. v. Selbst
Ordеr, Supreme Court, New York County, entered December 2, 1976, denying plaintiff’s motiоn for a preliminary injunction and granting defendants’ cross motion for a dismissal of the complaint for failure of the plaintiff to comply with seсtion 1312 of the Business Corporation Law, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs and without disbursements, and the matter remanded for a hearing to dеtermine whether the plaintiff is "doing business” in New York within the meaning of section 1312 of the Business Corporation Law. The application for preliminаry injunctive relief should be held in abeyance pending completion of the hearing. Beltone Electronics Corporation manufactures and distributes hearing aids and related accessories. Beltone is an Illinois corporation with a principal place of business in Chicago, Illinois. It claims to do business by direct mail order from Chicago to the place of delivery, and payment for goods is mailed to Beltone in Chicago. It also has arrangements with franchised dealers for the sale of its products. "Beltone” is a trademark on the principal register in the United Statеs Patent Office. The defendants were at one time franchised dealers of Beltone and, though they no longer act in that capaсity, they continue to use the name Beltone. The plaintiff therefore brought two actions: one for injunctive relief to prevent continued use of the name Beltone, and the other seeking to recover moneys allegedly owed to Beltone from the defendants while they were still franchised dealers. Special Term denied the injunctive reliеf and dismissed the complaint for the failure of Beltone to comрly with section 1312 of the Business Corporation Law. We would reverse. Section 1312 of the Business Corporation Law provides that a foreign corporation doing business in this State without authority may not maintain an actiоn in this State until it has been authorized to do business here and paid the necessary fees. However, the standard of "doing business” for section 1312 of thе Business Corporation Law purposes is different from that required for jurisdictional purposes (Tauza v Susquehanna Coal Co.,