Hays v. Penn Traffic Co.

270 A.D.2d 941, 705 N.Y.S.2d 908, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3452
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 29, 2000·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: We agree with plaintiff that Supreme Court properly denied that part of defendant’s motion seeking summary judgment on the false arrest cause of action. However, defendant is entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint to the extent that it alleges a cause of action for prima facie tort, i.e., the infliction of intentional harm, based on plaintiff’s failure to plead special damages (see, Lincoln First Bank v Siegel, 60 AD2d 270, 279-280), and we modify the order accordingly. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Buckley, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Hayes, J. P., Hurlbutt, Scudder and Kehoe, JJ.

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

Hays v. Penn Traffic Co., 270 A.D.2d 941, 705 N.Y.S.2d 908, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3452 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

270 A.D.2d 941 (Hays v. Penn Traffic Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Keskin v. State
14 Misc. 3d 537 (New York State Court of Claims, 2006)