Opinion
April 18, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Becker, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the application is denied.
The courts of this State have not countenanced a cause of action to recover damages for wrongful discharge based on provisions in a personnel policy manual absent proof of an express agreement limiting the employer's right to discharge at-will employees upon which the employee relied to his or her detriment (see, Scheiber v St. John's Univ., 195 A.D.2d 544; Baker v Citibank, 178 A.D.2d 627; Paolucci v Adult Retardates Ctr., 182 A.D.2d 681; Paruolo v Cohen, 167 A.D.2d 454; Scordo v Scaturro Supermarkets, 160 A.D.2d 932; Marvin v Kent Nursing Home, 153 A.D.2d 553). Accordingly, the petitioner has not demonstrated facts which fairly indicate that she has some cause of action against the appellant which warrants pre-action disclosure (see, Stewart v Socony Vacuum Oil Co., 3 A.D.2d 582, 583; see also, Liberty Imports v Bourguet, 146 A.D.2d 535; Matter of Gleich v Kissinger, 111 A.D.2d 130, 131; Hoffman v Batridge, 155 Misc.2d 862; Hill v Springer, 132 Misc.2d 1012). Bracken, J.P., Sullivan, Miller and Hart, JJ., concur.