Foussard v. Olarte-Foussard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Foussard v. Olarte-Foussard

128 A.D.3d 549, 8 N.Y.S.3d 562

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

DecidedMay 19, 2015

Docket15173N 100154/10

StatusPublished

This text of 128 A.D.3d 549 (Foussard v. Olarte-Foussard) 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

Foussard v. Olarte-Foussard, 128 A.D.3d 549, 8 N.Y.S.3d 562 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Wooten, J.), entered December 13, 2013, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgement dismissing the malicious prosecution cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

*550 Dismissal of the malicious prosecution claim was warranted where the record, including plaintiffs threatening emails to defendant, demonstrates that the criminal proceeding against him did not lack probable cause (see generally Brown v Sears Roebuck & Co., 297 AD2d 205, 208 [1st Dept 2002]). Furthermore, defendant, a civilian, did not initiate the criminal proceeding, but merely conveyed information to the authorities (see Moorhouse v Standard, N.Y., 124 AD3d 1, 7-8 [1st Dept 2014]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Acosta, Saxe, ManzanetDaniels and Clark, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Wooten, J.), entered December 13, 2013, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgement dismissing the malicious prosecution cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

*550 Dismissal of the malicious prosecution claim was warranted where the record, including plaintiffs threatening emails to defendant, demonstrates that the criminal proceeding against him did not lack probable cause (see generally Brown v Sears Roebuck & Co., 297 AD2d 205, 208 [1st Dept 2002]). Furthermore, defendant, a civilian, did not initiate the criminal proceeding, but merely conveyed information to the authorities (see Moorhouse v Standard, N.Y., 124 AD3d 1, 7-8 [1st Dept 2014]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Acosta, Saxe, ManzanetDaniels and Clark, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 A.D.3d 549, 8 N.Y.S.3d 562, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foussard-v-olarte-foussard-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack