Critton v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Critton v. State

12 A.D.3d 216, 783 N.Y.S.2d 804, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13145

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

DecidedNovember 9, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 12 A.D.3d 216 (Critton v. State) 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

Critton v. State, 12 A.D.3d 216, 783 N.Y.S.2d 804, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13145 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Court of Claims of the State of New York (Ferris D. Lebous, J.), entered on or about May 27, 2003, which dismissed the claim after a trial, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The causes of action for assault and battery, abuse of process and false arrest/false imprisonment were time-barred; the court was without jurisdiction to grant claimant’s untimely application to treat his notice of intention to sue as his claim, for his failure to comply with Court of Claims Act § 10 (8) (see Byrne v State of New York, 104 AD2d 782 [1984], lv denied 64 NY2d 607 [1985]). The court’s refusal to toll the statute of limitations due to the death of claimant’s attorney was a proper exercise of discretion under the circumstances.

[217]*217Regarding the cause of action for tortious interference with prospective contractual relations, claimant was a probationary employee, terminable at will, and he failed to establish wrongful means 'or malicious intent on the part of his employer (cf. Guard-Life Corp. v Parker Hardware Mfg. Corp., 50 NY2d 183, 194 [1980]).

We have considered claimant’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Williams, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

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

Judgment, Court of Claims of the State of New York (Ferris D. Lebous, J.), entered on or about May 27, 2003, which dismissed the claim after a trial, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The causes of action for assault and battery, abuse of process and false arrest/false imprisonment were time-barred; the court was without jurisdiction to grant claimant’s untimely application to treat his notice of intention to sue as his claim, for his failure to comply with Court of Claims Act § 10 (8) (see Byrne v State of New York, 104 AD2d 782 [1984], lv denied 64 NY2d 607 [1985]). The court’s refusal to toll the statute of limitations due to the death of claimant’s attorney was a proper exercise of discretion under the circumstances.

[217]*217Regarding the cause of action for tortious interference with prospective contractual relations, claimant was a probationary employee, terminable at will, and he failed to establish wrongful means 'or malicious intent on the part of his employer (cf. Guard-Life Corp. v Parker Hardware Mfg. Corp., 50 NY2d 183, 194 [1980]).

We have considered claimant’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Williams, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.D.3d 216, 783 N.Y.S.2d 804, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/critton-v-state-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack