Opinion
July 20, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Mastro, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In considering a motion to dismiss a complaint for failure to state a cause of action (see, CPLR 3211 [a] [7]), the pleadings must be liberally construed (see, CPLR 3026). The sole criteria is whether "from [the complaint's] four corners factual allegations are discerned which taken together manifest any cause of action cognizable at law" (Guggenheimer v. Ginsburg, 43 N.Y.2d 268, 275; see also, Bovino v. Village of Wappingers Falls, 215 A.D.2d 619). The facts pleaded are presumed to be true and are to be accorded every favorable inference, although bare legal conclusions as well as factual claims flatly contradicted by the record are not entitled to such consideration (see, Morone v. Morone, 50 N.Y.2d 481; Gertler v. Goodgold, 107 A.D.2d 481, affd 66 N.Y.2d 946).
All of the plaintiff's causes of action were either bare legal conclusions unsupported by factual allegations or were claims not recognized in an at-will employment situation (see, ingle v. Glamore Motor Sales, 73 N.Y.2d 183; Murphy v. American Home Prods. Corp., 58 N.Y.2d 293). Thus, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the complaint.
Bracken, J. P., Pizzuto, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.