Shiffman v. Empire Blue Cross and Blue Shield

Decision Date15 December 1998
Citation681 N.Y.S.2d 511,256 A.D.2d 131
Parties27 Media L. Rep. 1479, 1998 N.Y. Slip Op. 11,083 Felix SHIFFMAN, M.D., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. EMPIRE BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD, et al., Defendants, and CBS Inc., et al., Defendants-Appellants.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Elliot R. Polland, for Plaintiff-Respondent.

Anthony M. Bongiorno, for Defendants-Appellants.

Before LERNER, P.J., and WILLIAMS, TOM and ANDRIAS, JJ.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered on or about May 6, 1998, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by appellants' brief, granted plaintiff's motion to dismiss defendants' first, third, fourth and fifth affirmative defenses and denied defendants' cross motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously modified, on the law, the cross motion granted to the extent of dismissing the claim for punitive damages, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

In this action for civil trespass, it is undisputed that defendants gained entry to plaintiff's private medical office by having a reporter pose as a potential patient using a false identity and bogus insurance card. We agree with the motion court that defendants' affirmative defenses based upon consent and implied consent to enter the promises were legally insufficient since consent obtained by misrepresentation or fraud is invalid (see, Restatement 2d, Torts, § 330, Comment g; People v. Thompson, 116 A.D.2d 377, 381, 501 N.Y.S.2d 381) and also agree that the affirmative defense premised upon State and Federal constitutional free speech guarantees is without merit as such guarantees confer no privilege for trespass.

While the motion court properly denied defendants' cross motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action based on plaintiff's alleged failure to plead actual damages, plaintiff's claim for punitive damages should be dismissed. Although plaintiff failed to allege any actual damage to his possessory interest by reason of the reporter's unlawful, yet non-disruptive, entry into his private medical office, nominal damage is always presumed from a trespass (see, Kronos, Inc. v. AVX Corp., 81 N.Y.2d 90, 95, 595 N.Y.S.2d 931, 612 N.E.2d 289; Butler v. Ratner, 173 Misc.2d 783, 662 N.Y.S.2d 696). Punitive damages, however, are not recoverable inasmuch as there is no evidence the complained-of trespass was motivated by malice.

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Planned Parenthood Fed'n of Am., Inc. v. Ctr. for Med. Progress
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of California
    • 23 Agosto 2019
    ...are expected if not contractually required. Defendants cannot ignore the context. Cf. Shiffman v. Empire Blue Cross and Blue Shield , 256 A.D.2d 131, 681 N.Y.S.2d 511, 512 (1998) (reporter who gained entry to medical office by posing as potential patient using false identification and insur......
  • Keyzer v. Amerlink, Ltd.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 20 Septiembre 2005
    ...misrepresentation, the consent is not effective for the unexpected invasion or harm") and Shiffman v. Empire Blue Cross and Blue Shield, 256 A.D.2d 131, 681 N.Y.S.2d 511, 512 (App.Div.1998) (reporter who gained entry to medical office by posing as potential patient using false identificatio......
  • Madison 96TH Assocs., LLC v. 17 E. 96TH Owners Corp.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 14 Agosto 2014
    ...cases (see Kronos, Inc. v. AVX Corp., 81 N.Y.2d 90, 95–96, 595 N.Y.S.2d 931, 612 N.E.2d 289 [1993];Shiffman v. Empire Blue Cross & Blue Shield, 256 A.D.2d 131, 681 N.Y.S.2d 511 [1st Dept.1998] ), obviating the need for plaintiff to make out a prima facie case for damages on its motion for s......
  • Julia Props., LLC v. Levy
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 30 Marzo 2016
    ...116 A.D.3d 121, 132, 983 N.Y.S.2d 110 ; Gates v. AT & T Corp., 100 A.D.3d at 1220, 956 N.Y.S.2d 589 ; Shiffman v. Empire Blue Cross & Blue Shield, 256 A.D.2d 131, 681 N.Y.S.2d 511 ). Moreover, the plaintiff may be entitled to recover "consequential damages such as ... damages caused by disc......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles

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