Nicholson v. Luce

Decision Date21 October 2008
Docket Number109438/03.,4339.
Citation2008 NY Slip Op 7978,866 N.Y.S.2d 52,55 A.D.3d 416
PartiesCAROLINE NICHOLSON, Individually and as Parent and Natural Guardian of FAITH NICHOLSON, an Infant, Respondent, v. LEILA HADLEY LUCE et al., Appellants.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

A claim for sexual assault may be framed as a claim for either assault or battery (see generally Waxter v State of New York, 33 AD3d 1180, 1182 [2006]; Physicians' Reciprocal Insurers v Loeb, 291 AD2d 541, 542-543 [2002]; N.X. v Cabrini Med. Ctr., 280 AD2d 34, 36 [2001], mod 97 NY2d 247 [2002]; Dolback v Reeves, 265 AD2d 625, 625 [1999]). Plaintiffs pleaded both. On defendants' prior motion addressed to the sufficiency of the pleadings, the court dismissed the claim for battery because there was no allegation of offensive bodily contact (see Charkhy v Altman, 252 AD2d 413, 414 [1998]). On the instant motion, the court correctly declined to dismiss the claim for assault because the record presents issues of fact whether defendant Leila Hadley Luce's "physical conduct plac[ed] [her minor granddaughter] in imminent apprehension of harmful contact" (Fugazy v Corbetta, 34 AD3d 728, 729 [2006] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Charkhy at 414; Reichle v Mayeri, 110 AD2d 694 [1985]).

Concur—Tom, J.P., Gonzalez, Williams, Moskowitz and Freedman, JJ.

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Annozine v. Collins
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • 21 Noviembre 2012
    ...assault claim requires a showing of physical conduct causing plaintiff apprehension of immediate harmful contact. Nicholson v. Luce, 55 A.D.3d 416 (1st Dept 2008); Holtz v. Wildenstein & Co., 261 A.D.2d 336 (1st Dep't 1999); Charkhy v. Altman, 252 A.D.2d 413, 414 (1st Dep't 1998); Hassan v.......
  • Annozine v. Collins
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • 21 Noviembre 2012
    ...assault claim requires a showing of physical conduct causing plaintiff apprehension of immediate harmful contact. Nicholson v. Luce, 55 A.D.3d 416 (1st Dept 2008); Holtz v. Wildenstein & Co., 261 A.D.2d 336 (1st Dep't 1999); Charkhy v. Altman, 252 A.D.2d 413, 414 (1st Dep't 1998); Hassan v.......
  • Forras v. Rauf, Index No. 111970/2010
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • 14 Noviembre 2012
    ...Claim Assault requires a showing of physical conduct causing plaintiff apprehension of immediate harmful contact. Nicholson v. Luce, 55 A.D.3d 416 (1st Dept 2008); Holtz v. Wildenstein & Co., 261 A.D.2d 336 (1st Dep't 1999); Charkhy v. Altman. 252 A.D.2d 413, 414 (1st Dep't 1998); Hassan v.......
  • Forras v. Rauf
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • 13 Noviembre 2012
    ...Claim Assault requires a showing of physical conduct causing plaintiff apprehension of immediate harmful contact. Nicholson v. Luce, 55 A.D.3d 416 (1st Dept 2008); Holtz v. Wildenstein & Co., 261 A.D.2d 336 (1st Dep't 1999); Charkhy v. Altman, 252 A.D.2d 413, 414 (1st Dep't 1998); Hassan v.......
  • 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