Segreto v. Petrelli Associates, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Segreto v. Petrelli Associates, Inc.

285 A.D.2d 499, 728 N.Y.S.2d 488, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7073

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 9, 2001·Published

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for malicious prosecution, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Klein, J.), dated September 26, 2000, which granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The torts of abuse of process and malicious prosecution possess the common element of improper purpose in the use of legal process (see, Board of Educ. v Farmingdale Classroom Teachers Assn., 38 NY2d 397). In a prior action, the plaintiffs’ second counterclaim alleging abuse of process was properly dismissed (see, Petrelli Assocs. v Germano, 277 AD2d 439). Accordingly, the doctrine of collateral estoppel precludes the plaintiffs’ attempt to relitigate the issues decided in the prior action (see, Continental Cas. Co. v Rapid-American Corp., 80 NY2d 640; see also, Hornstein v Wolf, 67 NY2d 721).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit. Altman, J. P., Friedmann, Smith and Adams, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for malicious prosecution, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Klein, J.), dated September 26, 2000, which granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The torts of abuse of process and malicious prosecution possess the common element of improper purpose in the use of legal process (see, Board of Educ. v Farmingdale Classroom Teachers Assn., 38 NY2d 397). In a prior action, the plaintiffs’ second counterclaim alleging abuse of process was properly dismissed (see, Petrelli Assocs. v Germano, 277 AD2d 439). Accordingly, the doctrine of collateral estoppel precludes the plaintiffs’ attempt to relitigate the issues decided in the prior action (see, Continental Cas. Co. v Rapid-American Corp., 80 NY2d 640; see also, Hornstein v Wolf, 67 NY2d 721).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit. Altman, J. P., Friedmann, Smith and Adams, JJ., concur.

Segreto v. Petrelli Associates, Inc., 285 A.D.2d 499, 728 N.Y.S.2d 488, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7073 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

285 A.D.2d 499 (Segreto v. Petrelli Associates, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related