Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
SAGE REALTY CORPORATION, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants-Respondents, v. Sandra KERIN, Defendant-Respondent-Appellant, Lois Weiss, et al., Defendants.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barry Cozier, J.), entered on or about June 14, 2000, which, in an action for breach of the non-disparagement clause contained in the parties' employment “separation agreement” and for breach of the duty of loyalty, inter alia, granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs to defendant-respondent-appellant payable by plaintiffs.
The contract clause in question requires defendant to refrain from making disparaging comments about plaintiff or assisting others in doing so. The cause of action based on this clause alleges that shortly after defendant left plaintiff's employ, she was interviewed by a trade paper, which reported that she “decided she'd rather hit the pavement than [plaintiff's principal]”. Even assuming that such language can be reasonably understood as disparaging, the cause of action based thereon was properly dismissed, after depositions of both defendant and the reporter had been taken, in the absence of any evidence that defendant solicited the interview or suggested the language in the article or provided any information which would support the implication. Nor is there any merit to the cause of action for breach of the duty of loyalty, the record establishing that all of the alleged breaches were known to plaintiff at the time it entered into the separation agreement, which contained a general release (cf., H.W. Collections v. Kolber, 256 A.D.2d 240, 241, 682 N.Y.S.2d 189). We have considered the parties' other contentions for affirmative relief and find them unavailing.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 27, 2001
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)