Defendant-appellant manufacturer's exclusive distributorship agreement with co-defendant distributor, covering as it did the entire United States, provided ample basis for the IAS Court's finding that appellant should have reasonably expected that persons in New York would be purchasing and using its coffee maker (see, Darienzo v. Wise Shoe Stores, 74 A.D.2d 342). Moreover, it is not disputed that defendant-appellant received substantial revenues from interstate or international commerce.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.