Slifer-Weickel, Inc. v. Meteor Skelly, Inc.

• Decision Date: 02 May 1988
• Docket Number: SLIFER-WEICKE,INC
• Citation: 140 A.D.2d 320,527 N.Y.S.2d 553
• Parties: , et al., Appellants, v. METEOR SKELLY, INC., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 553

527 N.Y.S.2d 553

140 A.D.2d 320

SLIFER-WEICKEL, INC., et al., Appellants, v. METEOR SKELLY, INC., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division,

Second Department.

May 2, 1988.

Hockert & Flamm, New York City (Leonard N. Flamm, of counsel), for appellants.

Shamberg Marwell Cherneff & Hocherman, P.C., Mount Kisco (Robert F. Davis, of counsel), for respondents.

Before MOLLEN, P.J., and MANGANO, BRACKEN and LAWRENCE, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for tortious interference with business relations, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from (1) so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.), entered January 5, 1987, as granted the motion of the defendants Meteor Skelly, Inc., R.F. Skelly and Associates, Inc., and Meteor Associates, Inc. (hereinafter collectively referred to as Meteor) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, and denied as moot their cross motion, inter alia, to conduct further discovery; and (2) an order of the same court, entered May 8, 1987, which denied their motion for reargument.

ORDERED that the judgment entered January 5, 1987, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appeal from the order entered May 8, 1987, is dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument; and it is further,

ORDERED that the defendants Meteor are awarded one bill of costs.

The plaintiff, Slifer-Weickel Inc., of which the plaintiff Herbert Slifer is the president and principal shareholder, is a sales commission broker and manufacturer's representative engaged in the business of the marketing and distribution of health and beauty products. The defendants Meteor are competitors of the plaintiffs and the defendant Michael E. Bagley is the former Eastern Regional Manager for Chesebrough-Ponds Inc. (hereinafter Ponds), a national manufacturer of health and beauty products. Ponds was Slifer-Weickel's principal client for 11 years. In June 1981 after Herbert Slifer accepted the offer of his friend Lawrence Ferolie to form a new company, Slifer-Ferolie, of which he was to be the president of the health and beauty division, Slifer-Ferolie succeeded to the Ponds account. Slifer-Ferolie retained the Ponds account until 1984, when Ponds elected to engage its own in-house sales force.

By a complaint dated May 16, 1984, the plaintiffs commenced this suit against the defendants Meteor and Bagley asserting, in relevant part, causes of actions based upon allegations of (1) tortious interference with the plaintiffs' business relations with Ponds, (2) tortious interference with the performance of the plaintiffs' contract with Ponds, (3) prima facie tort, and (4) a violation of Penal Law § 180.03 (commercial bribing in the first degree) against Meteor. The gravamen of the complaint was Herbert Slifer's conclusory allegations that prior to the formation of Slifer-Ferolie in 1981, there were rumors in the industry that Slifer-Weickel might lose the Ponds account; that Bagley had made unspecifi disparaging remarks to unidentified officials of Ponds about Slifer-Weickel's performance; that Bagley met with Meteor ostensibly for the purpose of replacing Slifer-Weickel with Meteor as Ponds' representative; that Bagley had acquired a BMW automobile which was registered at the address of the private residence of Meteor's president; and that Bagley had called Ferolie, telling him there would be no assurance that the Ponds account would be transferred to the newly created company.

...