Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in dismissing the complaint insofar as it alleges a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff's action was not barred by the one-year Statute of Limitations (see, CPLR 215; Gallagher v Directors Guild, 144 A.D.2d 261, lv denied 73 N.Y.2d 708) because plaintiff sufficiently set forth concrete factual allegations of a continuing course of conduct that terminated within one year of plaintiff's commencing this action (see, Misek-Falkoff v International Bus. Machs. Corp., 162 A.D.2d 211, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 708; cf., Weisman v Weisman, 108 A.D.2d 852, 854). We further conclude that plaintiff's allegations are sufficient to raise a factual issue whether defendant's conduct toward him was outrageous in character and extreme in degree (see, Murphy v American Home Prods. Corp., 58 N.Y.2d 293, 303; see also, Howell v New York Post Co., 81 N.Y.2d 115, 121-122; Freihofer v Hearst Corp., 65 N.Y.2d 135, 143).

The complaint, insofar as it can be construed as alleging a cause of action in prima facie tort, was properly dismissed. A plaintiff who can allege a traditional tort may not rely upon a theory of prima facie tort to avoid the one-year Statute of Limitations for intentional torts (see, Jones v City of New York, 161 A.D.2d 518, 519; see also, Curiano v Suozzi, 63 N.Y.2d 113, 117-119).

The court should have granted plaintiff's motion for renewal of defendant's motion to disqualify plaintiff's attorney and, upon renewal, should have denied the motion. A disqualification motion must be "carefully scrutinized" because it "denies a party's right to representation by the attorney of [his] choice" (S S Hotel Ventures Ltd. Partnership v 777 S.H. Corp., 69 N.Y.2d 437, 443). Plaintiff demonstrated that defendant's grounds for seeking disqualification were without merit and that the motion was made to gain a "strategic advantage" over plaintiff (S S Hotel Ventures Ltd. Partnership v 777 S.H. Corp., supra, at 443). Moreover, plaintiff was unsuccessful in his effort to secure the services of another attorney.