Opinion
Submitted March 3, 2000.
April 13, 2000.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful eviction and intentional infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiff Maria Gkanios appeals, as limited by her brief, from (1) so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.), entered September 28, 1998, as granted the respondents' motion to dismiss her causes of action to recover damages for wrongful eviction, conversion, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, (2) an order of the same court dated December 8, 1998, which denied her motion to reargue the order dated September 28, 1998, and (3) so much of an order of the same court entered December 24, 1998, as denied her motion to amend the complaint.
Maria Gkanios, Mahopac, N.Y., appellant pro se.
McCullough, Goldberger Staudt, White Plains, N.Y. (Patricia W. Gurahian and Edmund C. Grainger III of counsel), for respondents.
DANIEL W. JOY, J.P., WILLIAM C. THOMPSON, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the appeal from the order dated December 8, 1998, is dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument; and it is further,
ORDERED that the orders entered September 28, 1998, and December 24, 1998, are affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
ORDERED that the defendants are awarded one bill of costs.
Pursuant to a judgment entered upon the failure of the plaintiff Nikki Restaurant, Inc. (hereinafter Nikki), to appear or answer in an eviction proceeding based upon the nonpayment of rent, Nikki was evicted from the subject premises on or about March 12, 1991. The plaintiffs did not commence this action until December 6, 1994.
Contrary to the plaintiffs' contentions, the Supreme Court properly dismissed their causes of action to recover damages for wrongful eviction as time-barred (see, Urra v. Friedman, 231 A.D.2d 710 ;Klishwick v. Popovicki, 186 A.D.2d 173, 174 ; Jones v. City of New York, 161 A.D.2d 518, 519 ; Kolomensky v. Wiener, 135 A.D.2d 505 ). Similarly, the cause of action sounding in conversion was also properly dismissed as time-barred (see, CPLR 214; Vigilant Ins. Co. of America v. Housing Auth. of City of El Paso, Tex., 87 N.Y.2d 36, 44 ; Catlin v. Manilow, 170 A.D.2d 357 ), because the date of the eviction was also the date of the alleged conversion.
The Supreme Court properly found that the plaintiffs' cause of action to recover damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress was untimely (see, CPLR 215; Peters v. Citibank, N.A., 253 A.D.2d 803 ; Hansen v. Petrone, 124 A.D.2d 782 ). Moreover, the Supreme Court also properly dismissed this cause of action for failure to state a cause of action (see, Nauheimer v. Archdiocese of New York, 260 A.D.2d 615 [2d Dept, Apr. 26, 1999]; see generally, Howell v. New York Post Co., 81 N.Y.2d 115, 122, aff'd 82 N.Y.2d 690; Herlihy v. Metropolitan Museum of Art., 214 A.D.2d 250, 262 ).
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiffs' motion to amend their complaint (see, Duffy v. Wetzler, 260 A.D.2d 596 ; Noanjo Clothing Inc. v. L M; Kids Fashion, Inc., 207 A.D.2d 436 ).
The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit.