Moore v. Schoop

• Court: Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
• Decided: March 16, 2017
• Docket: 2017 NYSlipOp 50317(U)
• Status: Published

Opinion

Jeanne E. Moore, Plaintiff-Appellant,

against

Stephan A. Schoop and Kirzy Paredes, Defendants-Respondents.

Plaintiff appeals from two judgments of the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Debra Rose Samuels, J.), entered on or about June 23, 2016, after trial, in favor of defendants dismissing the respective actions.

Per Curiam.

Judgments (Debra Rose Samuels, J.), entered on or about June 23, 2016, affirmed, without costs.

Civil Court applied the appropriate rules and principles of substantive law and accomplished "substantial justice" in dismissing plaintiff's claim for malicious prosecution (see CCA 1807; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125 [2000], lv denied 95 NY2d 898 [2000]), since the record does not support a finding that defendants initiated the criminal proceeding against plaintiff without probable cause and with malice (see Colon v City of New York, 60 NY2d 78, 82 [1983]; Patrick v United Parcel Serv., Inc., 141 AD3d 436 [2016]). The record shows only that defendants provided the police with information; there is no evidence that defendants induced the authorities to act (see Moorhouse v Standard, NY, 124 AD3d 1, 7-8 [2014]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur

Decision Date: March 16, 2017