FRONT, INC., Plaintiff-res-ap, v. PHILIP KHALIL Defendants-Appellants-res

9252. FRONT, INC., Plaintiff-res-ap, v. PHILIP KHALIL Defendants-Appellants-res — PHILIP KHALIL, Third-Party plf-ap, v. JEFFREY A. KIMMEL Third-Party def-res — The Marantz Law Firm, Rye (Neil G. Marantz of counsel), for appellants-respondents/ ap — Meister Seelig & Fein LLP, New York (Jeffrey A. Kimmel of counsel), for res-res — Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP, Hawthorne (Lisa L. Shrewsberry of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Donna M. Mills, J.), entered May 25, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from, granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint as against defendant James O’Callaghan for lack of personal jurisdiction, granted the motion as to defendant Eckersley O’Callaghan Structural Design (EOC) (with O’Callaghan, the UK defendants) to the extent of referring the issue of long-arm jurisdiction pursuant to CPLR 302(a), granted the motion to dismiss the first cause of action as against defendant Philip Khalil, denied the motion to dismiss the fifth through eleventh causes of action, and denied the motion to disqualify third-party defendants from serving as counsel for plaintiff in the main action, and granted third-party defendants’ motion to dismiss the third-party complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint as against the UK defendants for lack of personal jurisdiction, and to grant the motion to dismiss the tenth and eleventh causes of action as against the UK defendants, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

The complaint alleges that Khalil, an employee of plaintiff, and employees of EOC, including O’Callaghan, worked together to use plaintiff’s confidential and proprietary information to divert work for Apple Inc., including a project for the Apple Store on Broadway in Manhattan, from plaintiff to Khalil and EOC. These allegations are sufficient to establish that the UK defendants transacted business in New York, through Khalil as their agent, and therefore to invoke jurisdiction over them pursuant to CPLR 302(a)(1) (see New Media Holding Co. LLC v. Kagalovsky, 97 AD3d 463 [1st Dept 2012]).