Starishevsky v. Parker
Decision Date | 26 March 1996 |
Citation | 639 N.Y.S.2d 377,225 A.D.2d 480 |
Parties | , 108 Ed. Law Rep. 352 Ruben STARISHEVSKY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Dean PARKER, Defendant-Appellant, and Elizabeth Haggerty, et al., Defendants. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Richard C. Cahn, for plaintiff-respondent.
John Ray, for defendant-appellant.
Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and ROSENBERGER, NARDELLI, WILLIAMS and TOM, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Alan Oshrin, J.), entered December 14, 1995, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant-appellant's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff's allegations, presumed to be true for the purposes of this motion to dismiss, that defendant-appellant unethically counseled a university student to file a sexual harassment claim that appellant knew to be false and that had a direct bearing on the university's decision to terminate plaintiff's employment wrongfully (Matter of Starishevsky v. Hofstra Univ., 161 Misc.2d 137, 612 N.Y.S.2d 794), that appellant created a hostile atmosphere by divulging confidential harassment proceedings to a newspaper reporter for publication, and that appellant was motivated by a personal vendetta against plaintiff, are sufficient to show that appellant acted solely with disinterested malevolence in seeing plaintiff fired (Burns Jackson Miller Summit & Spitzer v. Lindner, 59 N.Y.2d 314, 333, 464 N.Y.S.2d 712, 451 N.E.2d 459). They are accompanied by a particularized claim of special damages in the form of identifiable lost wages and benefits and are sufficient to state a cause of action for prima facie tort (id., at 332, 464 N.Y.S.2d 712, 451 N.E.2d 459).
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gray v. Grove Mfg. Co., Div. Of Kidde, Inc., CV 96 3467 (RJD).
...Corp. v. Bd. of Educ. of New York City, 204 A.D.2d 106, 108, 611 N.Y.S.2d 529 (1st Dep't 1994); see also Starishevsky v. Parker, 225 A.D.2d 480, 480, 639 N.Y.S.2d 377 (1st Dep't 1996) (wages and benefits must be identifiable). Round figures with no itemization do not satisfy the requirement......
-
Higgins v. Gladstone Gallery LLC
... ... personal animosity toward her, "are sufficient to show ... that [Gladstone] acted solely with disinterested ... malevolence" (Starishevsky v Parker, 225 A.D.2d ... 480, 480 [1st Dept 1996]). A proposed amendment to the ... complaint adds that "Falkenstein told Plaintiff ... "well, we ... ...
- People v. Wyche