Campbell v. Self Initiated Living Options, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Campbell v. Self Initiated Living Options, Inc.

134 A.D.3d 757, 19 N.Y.S.3d 910

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 9, 2015

Docket2014-00433

StatusPublished

This text of 134 A.D.3d 757 (Campbell v. Self Initiated Living Options, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Campbell v. Self Initiated Living Options, Inc., 134 A.D.3d 757, 19 N.Y.S.3d 910 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of implied contract, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mayer, J.), dated September 19, 2013, which granted the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the amended complaint for failure to state a cause of action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Even accepting as true the facts alleged in the amended complaint and according the plaintiffs the benefit of every favorable inference (see CPLR 3211 [a] [7]; Campaign for Fiscal Equity v State of New York, 86 NY2d 307, 318 [1995]; see also Sokoloff v Harriman Estates Dev. Corp., 96 NY2d 409, 414 [2001]; Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]), the *758 plaintiffs, at-will employees of the defendant, failed to state a cause of action for breach of an implied contract (see CPLR 3211 [a] [7]; Weiner v McGraw-Hill, Inc., 57 NY2d 458 [1982]; Waddell v Boyce Thompson Inst. for Plant Research, Inc., 92 AD3d 1172 [2012]).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit (see CPLR 3211 [a] [7]). Rivera, J.P., Chambers, Sgroi and LaSalle, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of implied contract, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mayer, J.), dated September 19, 2013, which granted the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the amended complaint for failure to state a cause of action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Even accepting as true the facts alleged in the amended complaint and according the plaintiffs the benefit of every favorable inference (see CPLR 3211 [a] [7]; Campaign for Fiscal Equity v State of New York, 86 NY2d 307, 318 [1995]; see also Sokoloff v Harriman Estates Dev. Corp., 96 NY2d 409, 414 [2001]; Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]), the *758 plaintiffs, at-will employees of the defendant, failed to state a cause of action for breach of an implied contract (see CPLR 3211 [a] [7]; Weiner v McGraw-Hill, Inc., 57 NY2d 458 [1982]; Waddell v Boyce Thompson Inst. for Plant Research, Inc., 92 AD3d 1172 [2012]).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit (see CPLR 3211 [a] [7]). Rivera, J.P., Chambers, Sgroi and LaSalle, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

134 A.D.3d 757, 19 N.Y.S.3d 910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/campbell-v-self-initiated-living-options-inc-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack