Mangano v. Rite Aid Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mangano v. Rite Aid Corp.

297 A.D.2d 362, 746 N.Y.2d 602, 746 N.Y.S.2d 602, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8134

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

DecidedAugust 26, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 297 A.D.2d 362 (Mangano v. Rite Aid Corp.) 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

Mangano v. Rite Aid Corp., 297 A.D.2d 362, 746 N.Y.2d 602, 746 N.Y.S.2d 602, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8134 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

In the instant action, inter alia, to recover damages for malicious prosecution and abuse of process, the plaintiff Daniel Mangano alleges that the defendants maliciously instigated a criminal prosecution against him without proper investigation and that the defendants maliciously continued to seek his prosecution with the sole intent of causing him harm. After the defendants made out a prima case for summary judgment, the plaintiffs failed to raise any triable issue of fact either as to the defendants’ malicious intent (see Berliner v Burton, 283 AD2d 451) or as to the defendants’ intent to harm him or to use process improperly to obtain a collateral objective (see Curiano v Suozzi, 63 NY2d 113, 116).

Additionally, the Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment dismissing the causes of action for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and conversion. O’Brien, J.P., Friedmann, McGinity and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

In the instant action, inter alia, to recover damages for malicious prosecution and abuse of process, the plaintiff Daniel Mangano alleges that the defendants maliciously instigated a criminal prosecution against him without proper investigation and that the defendants maliciously continued to seek his prosecution with the sole intent of causing him harm. After the defendants made out a prima case for summary judgment, the plaintiffs failed to raise any triable issue of fact either as to the defendants’ malicious intent (see Berliner v Burton, 283 AD2d 451) or as to the defendants’ intent to harm him or to use process improperly to obtain a collateral objective (see Curiano v Suozzi, 63 NY2d 113, 116).

Additionally, the Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment dismissing the causes of action for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and conversion. O’Brien, J.P., Friedmann, McGinity and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

297 A.D.2d 362, 746 N.Y.2d 602, 746 N.Y.S.2d 602, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mangano-v-rite-aid-corp-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack