Rudolph Lodichand, et al., appellants, v. Lottie Rae Kogut, et al., defendants, Dorothy A. Phillips, etc., respondent. (2012)

Submitted—December 15, 2011

DECISION & ORDER

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for abuse of process and malicious prosecution, the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DeStefano, J.), dated January 3, 2011, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Dorothy A. Phillips, individually and as court attorney referee, which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against her.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs' contentions, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Dorothy A. Phillips, individually and as court attorney referee, which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against her.   Since the factual allegations of the complaint against Phillips merely asserted conduct by her in her official capacity as a court attorney referee, which is immune from suit under the doctrine of judicial immunity (see Mosher–Simons v. County of Allegany, 99 N.Y.2d 214, 219;  Tarter v. State of New York, 68 N.Y.2d 511, 517–518;  Alvarez v. Snyder, 264 A.D.2d 27, 34, cert denied sub nom.   Diaz v. Snyder, 531 U.S. 1158;  Misek–Falkoff v. Donovan, 250 A.D.2d 579;  Colin v. County of Suffolk, 181 A.D.2d 653, 654;  Lombardoni v. Boccaccio, 121 A.D.2d 828, 829), the allegations failed to state a cause of action against her (see Young v. Campbell, 87 AD3d 692, 693–694, lv denied NY3d, 2011 N.Y. Slip Op 92179 [2011];  Davey v. State of New York, 31 AD3d 600;  Alex–Mitchell:  El v. State of New York, 2 AD3d 549, 551–552;  Sassower v. Finnerty, 96 A.D.2d 585, 586–587).

The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit.

MASTRO, A.P.J., ANGIOLILLO, FLORIO and CHAMBERS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court