Henbest & Morrisey, Inc. v. WH Insurance Agency, Inc.

Decision Date04 March 1999
Citation259 A.D.2d 829,686 N.Y.S.2d 207
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
PartiesHENBEST & MORRISEY, INC., Respondent,<BR>v.<BR>W. H. INSURANCE AGENCY, INC. et al., Appellants.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur.

Mercure, J.

Plaintiff, an insurance agency situated in the City of Elmira, Chemung County, commenced this action for equitable relief and monetary damages arising out of the withdrawal of its president and director, defendant William H. Henbest, to establish a competing agency, defendant W. H. Insurance Agency, Inc., and the defection of two other of its key employees, defendants Denise L. Button and Judith E. Carson. The complaint alleges the individual defendants' breach of loyalty in formulating a plan to quit plaintiff's employ and form a competing business and in taking possession of plaintiff's customer list (first cause of action), Henbest's breach of fiduciary duty based upon his capacity as an officer and director of plaintiff (second cause of action), all defendants' unfair competition based upon their solicitation of plaintiff's customers (third cause of action), Henbest's breach of a written employment contract in using plaintiff's confidential customer list (fourth cause of action), all defendants' trademark infringement and unfair competition in using the name "Henbest" (fifth cause of action) and tortious interference with plaintiff's contractual relations (sixth cause of action). In lieu of an answer, defendants moved to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) and for summary judgment. Supreme Court denied the motion, and defendants appeal.

We affirm. Although not raised as an issue in either of the parties' briefs, it is fundamental law that a motion for summary judgment may not be made prior to joinder of issue (CPLR 3212 [a]). Further, although a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) may, and often should, be converted to a summary judgment motion by the court after adequate notice to the parties (CPLR 3211 [c]), no such notice appears to have been given in this case. Finally, although the notice requirement may be obviated in cases where it can be found that the parties "deliberately chart[ed] a summary judgment course" (Four Seasons Hotels v Vinnik, 127 AD2d 310, 320; accord, Gregware v Key Bank, 218 AD2d 859, 861, lv denied 87 NY2d 803), the present record does not support such a finding (see, Mihlovan v Grozavu, 72 NY2d 506). Notably, in opposing defendants' motion, plaintiff contended that summary judgment was premature and that discovery was necessary in order to ascertain critical evidence that was within defendants' sole knowledge and control.

The result of the foregoing is that in determining the motion to dismiss, we must accept the allegations of the complaint as true and ignore...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Nyahsa Servs., Inc. v. People Care Inc.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • December 5, 2014
    ...a motion under CPLR 3211(a)(1), the Court must “ignore the affidavits submitted by defendants” (Henbest & Morrisey v. W.H. Ins. Agency, 259 A.D.2d 829, 830, 686 N.Y.S.2d 207 [3d Dept 1990] ).Dismissal is warranted under CPLR 3211(a)(5) where the movant establishes that a cause of action may......
  • Krog Corp. v. Vanner Grp., Inc.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • August 22, 2016
    ...a motion under CPLR 3211(a)(1), the Court must "ignore the affidavits submitted by defendants" (Henbest & Morrisey v. W.H. Ins. Agency, 259 A.D.2d 829, 830, 686 N.Y.S.2d 207 [3d Dept 1990] ). Dismissal is warranted under CPLR 3211(a)(5) where the movant establishes that a cause of action ma......
  • Bahnuk v. Countryway Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • July 27, 2020
    ... ... COUNTRYWAY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant Index No. EFCA2019000970 ... Wegmans Food ... Mkts, Inc., 182 A.D.3d 667,668 (3 rd Dept ... 2020) ... Henbest & Morrisey, Inc. v. W.H. Ins. Agency, ... Inc., ... ...
  • Krusen v. Moss
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • July 18, 2019
    ...in his opposition papers that issue had not been joined and that there had been no discovery (see Henbest & Morrisey v. W.H. Ins. Agency, 259 A.D.2d 829, 829–830, 686 N.Y.S.2d 207 [1999] ). Furthermore, although a court may treat a pre-answer motion as one seeking summary judgment, it must ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT