Phillipe v. American Express Travel Related Services Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Phillipe v. American Express Travel Related Services Co.

174 A.D.2d 470, 571 N.Y.S.2d 711, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8492

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

DecidedJune 18, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 174 A.D.2d 470 (Phillipe v. American Express Travel Related Services Co.) 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

Phillipe v. American Express Travel Related Services Co., 174 A.D.2d 470, 571 N.Y.S.2d 711, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8492 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (C. Beauchamp Ciparick, J.), entered February 5, 1991, which granted defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) and dismissed the amended complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of denying the motion to dismiss the first cause of action and reinstating that cause of action and, as so modified, the order is otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff, against whom defendant obtained a default judgment for $9,470.53 in charges billed to her American Express card, brings this class action on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, who, it is alleged, had default judgments entered against them on the basis of so-called "sewer service” and false affidavits of non-military service.

In dismissing the first cause of action for abuse of process, the IAS court concluded that plaintiff failed to allege any facts sufficient to demonstrate that defendant acted with intent to cause harm without excuse or justification and found that, albeit defective, the use of process here was not improper or perverted, inasmuch as the action was to collect an apparently valid debt.

However, construing the complaint liberally and accepting plaintiffs allegations as true at this stage, as we must, the allegations of a large scale pattern of "sewer service” are sufficient, if proven, to establish a cause of action for abuse of process.

We have considered plaintiffs other contentions and find them without merit. Concur—Carro, J. P., Milonas, Wallach and Kupferman, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (C. Beauchamp Ciparick, J.), entered February 5, 1991, which granted defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) and dismissed the amended complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of denying the motion to dismiss the first cause of action and reinstating that cause of action and, as so modified, the order is otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff, against whom defendant obtained a default judgment for $9,470.53 in charges billed to her American Express card, brings this class action on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, who, it is alleged, had default judgments entered against them on the basis of so-called "sewer service” and false affidavits of non-military service.

In dismissing the first cause of action for abuse of process, the IAS court concluded that plaintiff failed to allege any facts sufficient to demonstrate that defendant acted with intent to cause harm without excuse or justification and found that, albeit defective, the use of process here was not improper or perverted, inasmuch as the action was to collect an apparently valid debt.

However, construing the complaint liberally and accepting plaintiffs allegations as true at this stage, as we must, the allegations of a large scale pattern of "sewer service” are sufficient, if proven, to establish a cause of action for abuse of process.

We have considered plaintiffs other contentions and find them without merit. Concur—Carro, J. P., Milonas, Wallach and Kupferman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 A.D.2d 470, 571 N.Y.S.2d 711, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8492, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phillipe-v-american-express-travel-related-services-co-nyappdiv-1991.