The motion court properly dismissed the complaint against defendant Malmrose based on plaintiff's failure to establish at the pretrial hearing that Malmrose, who is not a New York resident, had transacted business within the State, subjecting him to jurisdiction pursuant to CPLR 302(a)(1), or that he had committed a tort within the State, subjecting him to jurisdiction pursuant to CPLR 302(a)(2).
The court properly exercised its broad discretion in supervising the discovery process (see, Allen v. Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 N.Y.2d 403, 406) when it limited disclosure to the jurisdictional issue.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.