Tomassi v. Dominic

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tomassi v. Dominic

278 A.D.2d 880, 718 N.Y.S.2d 915, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13735

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 27, 2000·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing [881]*881the cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The conduct alleged is not sufficiently extreme or outrageous to support recovery on that theory (see, Dillon v City of New York, 261 AD2d 34, 41; DeFilippo v Xerox Corp., 223 AD2d 846, 847-848, lv dismissed 87 NY2d 1056; Foley v Mobil Chem. Co., 214 AD2d 1003, 1005). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Parker, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pine, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt and Kehoe, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing [881]*881the cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The conduct alleged is not sufficiently extreme or outrageous to support recovery on that theory (see, Dillon v City of New York, 261 AD2d 34, 41; DeFilippo v Xerox Corp., 223 AD2d 846, 847-848, lv dismissed 87 NY2d 1056; Foley v Mobil Chem. Co., 214 AD2d 1003, 1005). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Parker, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pine, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt and Kehoe, JJ.

Tomassi v. Dominic, 278 A.D.2d 880, 718 N.Y.S.2d 915, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13735 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

278 A.D.2d 880 (Tomassi v. Dominic) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related