Mattesich v. Hayground Cove Asset Management, LLC
Decision Date | 14 April 2009 |
Docket Number | 311. |
Parties | JOHN MATTESICH, Respondent, v. HAYGROUND COVE ASSET MANAGEMENT, LLC, et al., Appellants. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Plaintiff alleges that HCAM, his former employer, breached a nondisparagement agreement, and that, as a result, he was denied a position that he would have otherwise been offered. Defendants however submitted deposition testimony from members of the prospective employer who stated, inter alia, that although plaintiff was under consideration for employment, it was by no means certain that he would have been offered the position. Plaintiff would be unable to prove damages, and thus has no viable claim under a theory of either breach of contract (see Arts4All, Ltd. v Hancock, 5 AD3d 106, 108 [2004]; Gordon v Dino De Laurentiis Corp., 141 AD2d 435, 436 [1988]), or tortious interference with prospective economic advantage (see Slatkin v Lancer Litho Packaging Corp., 33 AD3d 421 [2006]; American Preferred Prescription v Health Mgt., 252 AD2d 414, 418-419 [1998]).
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Pezhman v. Chanel, Inc.
...employee at Lord & Taylor, failed to allege the existence of a firm offer of employment (see Mattesich v. Hayground Cove Asset Mgt., LLC, 61 A.D.3d 487, 487–88, 876 N.Y.S.2d 405 [1st Dept.2009] ; Murphy v. City of New York, 59 A.D.3d 301, 874 N.Y.S.2d 407 [1st Dept.2009] ). Even if she had,......
- Matter of Jayden R., 310.