Contracts · MBE-tested
Jeffrey E. Ramsey, Appellant, v. H.M.S. Inc. et al., Respondents
198 A.D.2d 868606 N.Y.S.2d 1022·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1993·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Jeffrey E. Ramsey, Appellant, v H.M.S. Inc. et al., Respondents.
[606 NYS2d 1022]
[MAJORITY]
—Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint because the proposed cause of action is without merit (see, Wieder v Skala, 168 AD2d 355). Supreme Court also properly granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint because plaintiff failed to state a legally sufficient cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress, prima facie tort, or wrongful discharge (see, Murphy v American Home Prods. Corp., 58 NY2d 293). Moreover, the submissions on the motion established that the individual defendants had the authority to contract with plaintiff. Thus, plaintiff cannot maintain a cause of action for wrongful interference with contractual rights against those defendants (see, Mansour v Abrams, 144 AD2d 905). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Chautauqua County, Gerace, J. — Wrongful Discharge.) Present — Denman, P. J., Balio, Fallon, Doerr and Davis, JJ.