From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Macholz v. Weiss

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 25, 2001
279 A.D.2d 557 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

January 25, 2001.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for the intentional infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Hall, J.), dated February 9, 2000, which granted the defendant' s motion to dismiss the cause of action sounding in intentional infliction of emotional distress as barred by the statute of limitations.

Julia Pamela Heit, New York, N.Y., and Vivian Shevitz, South Salem, N Y, for appellant (one brief filed).

L'Abbate, Balkan, Colavita Contini, LLP, Garden City, N Y (Matthew K. Flanagan of counsel), for respondent.

Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the cause of action sounding in intentional infliction of emotional distress on the ground that it is time-barred (see, CPLR 215; Langford v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, 271 A.D.2d 494; Weisman v. Weisman, 108 A.D.2d 853).


Summaries of

Macholz v. Weiss

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 25, 2001
279 A.D.2d 557 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Macholz v. Weiss

Case Details

Full title:ELIZABETH MACHOLZ, APPELLANT, v. MARK WEISS, ETC., RESPONDENT

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 25, 2001

Citations

279 A.D.2d 557 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
719 N.Y.S.2d 606

Citing Cases

Rafter v. Bank of America

In addition, an action brought because of a violation of New York's statutory right to privacy, or for…

Haughland v. Bill

The tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress has four elements: (1) extreme and outrageous…