Opinion
November 4, 1999
Robert A. Soloway, for Plaintiff-Respondent.
ELLERIN. P. J., WILLIAMS, WALLACH, BUCKLEY, FRIEDMAN, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Huff, J.), entered May 15, 1998, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by difendants-appellants' brief, denied defendants' motion to dismiss insofar as it sought dismissal of plaintiff's first and fifth causes of action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
The motion court properly found that plaintiff's allegations, that defendants, through various specified acts, deliberately, systematically and maliciously harassed him over a period of years so as to injure him in his capacity as a tenant, properly stated a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress (see, Green v. Fischbein Olivieri Rozenholc Badillo, 119 A.D.2d 345, 349-350). We perceive no merit to defendants' contention that plaintiff's cause for intentional infliction of emotional distress is duplicative of other causes in his complaint or that the allegations of the cause would be more appropriately asserted under the rubric of a different tort. Also proper was the motion court's conclusion that plaintiff had adequately stated a cause of action for unlawful arrest/imprisonment premised on his allegations that defendant Druckier "instigated" his arrest with knowledge that there was no lawful basis therefor (see, Donnelly v. Morace, 162 A.D.2d 247, 248; Barnes v. Bollhorst, 14 A.D.2d 774), and took an active role in plaintiff's prosecution by encouraging or importuning the authorities to act, with the intent to confine him (cf.,Celnick v. Freitag, 242 A.D.2d 436, 437).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.