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.
W.E. REST., INC., d/b/a The Dory, respondent, v. Mary C. WILSON, appellant.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for injurious falsehood, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Blydenburgh, J.), dated July 6, 2006, which denied her motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.
The plaintiff, which owns a restaurant, commenced this action against the defendant, Mary C. Wilson, a clerk in the Town of Shelter Island Building Department, alleging that she maliciously contacted the Suffolk County Department of Health Services for the purpose of triggering a wastewater review of the plaintiff's restaurant in order to injure the plaintiff. Thereafter, the defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff failed to serve a notice of claim in accordance with General Municipal Law § 50-e. The Supreme Court denied the motion, finding there were questions of fact, inter alia, as to whether the defendant was acting in her capacity as a Town employee. We disagree.
The defendant established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the plaintiff failed to serve a notice of claim before commencing the action and the conduct complained of occurred during the discharge of Wilson's duties within the scope of her employment (see Zwecker v. Clinch, 279 A.D.2d 572, 573, 720 N.Y.S.2d 150). In opposition, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and giving it the benefit of every favorable inference, the plaintiff failed to produce any evidence to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether Wilson was acting within the scope of her employment (see DeRise v. Kreinik, 10 A.D.3d 381, 780 N.Y.S.2d 773; Smith v. Collins, 221 A.D.2d 518, 634 N.Y.S.2d 401; McCormack v. Port Washington Union Free School Dist., 214 A.D.2d 546, 625 N.Y.S.2d 57; Agins v. Darmstadter, 153 A.D.2d 600, 544 N.Y.S.2d 635; Cioffi v. Giannone, 56 A.D.2d 620, 391 N.Y.S.2d 675).
Thank you for your feedback!
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 20, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)