Rolnick v. Rolnick

• Decision Date: 09 April 1969
• Citation: 300 N.Y.S.2d 586,24 N.Y.2d 805,248 N.E.2d 442
• Parties: , 248 N.E.2d 442 Albert ROLNICK, Appellant, v. Jacob ROLNICK, Respondent.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Page 586

300 N.Y.S.2d 586

24 N.Y.2d 805, 248 N.E.2d 442

Albert ROLNICK, Appellant, v.Jacob ROLNICK, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of New York.

April 9, 1969.

Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, 29 A.D.2d 987, 290 N.Y.S.2d 111.Harold Freund, for appellant.

Charles Feit, Garden City, and Jacob Rolnick, Brooklyn, pro se, for respondent.

Action was brought to recover damages for ouster of plaintiff from employment because of allegedly improper and malicious acts of defendant intended solely to inflict harm and damage on plaintiff.

The Supreme Court, Special Term, Nassau County, Joseph Liff, J., 55 Misc.2d 243, 284 N.Y.S.2d 908, entered an order denying a motion by the defendant for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

The Appellate Division, 29 A.D.2d 987, 290 N.Y.S.2d 111, entered an order April 22, 1968, which reversed the order of the Special Term and granted the motion.The Appellate Division held that the action was, regardless of label, one for traditional tort of inducing breach of employment contract and was governed and barred by three-year statute of limitations applicable to actions to recover damages for injury to property, formerly Civil Practice Act, § 49, subd. 7.

The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeals, contending that the action was governed by the six-year period of limitation provided by the former Civil Practice Act, § 48, subd. 3 for an action to recover damages for...