In the context of defendants' motion seeking to dismiss the complaint against certain defendants situated in Texas upon the ground that those defendants are not subject to the jurisdiction of New York courts, plaintiffs' allegations that transfers of assets to the Texas defendants occurred without consideration, and that the Texas defendants committed fraud by acting with others to place defendant judgment debtor's assets beyond plaintiff judgment creditors' reach, were sufficient to impose a burden upon defendants to show what consideration, if any, was given in exchange for the transferred assets (see, Ed Moore Adv. Agency, Inc. v. I.H.R., Inc., 114 A.D.2d 484). In view of defendants' failure to make such showing, the IAS court properly accepted the allegations of plaintiffs' complaint as true, and found, for purposes of deciding the motion, that defendants had committed a tortious act within the State, and are thus subject to the jurisdiction of this State's courts, pursuant to CPLR 302(a)(2).
We have considered defendants' remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.