From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bonarco, Ltd. v. Cossington Overseas LTD

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 9, 2000
269 A.D.2d 158 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

February 9, 2000

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered February 18, 1999, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, in an action against defendants-respondents for abuse of process, granted defendants-respondents' CPLR 3211(a)(7) motion to dismiss the complaint against them, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Timothy E. Hoeffner, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

J. William Koegel, Jr., for Defendants-Respondents.

SULLIVAN, J.P., WILLIAMS, MAZZARELLI, WALLACH, LERNER, JJ.


Under the instant circumstances, defendants-respondents' service of their summons and complaint, and the issuance, via proper judicial process, of the Russian court's restraining order on plaintiff's sale of stock purchased by it from a third party who stole it from defendants, are insufficient to support an abuse of process claim (Curiano v. Suozzi, 63 N.Y.2d 113; Park v. State of New York, 226 A.D.2d 153; Matthews v. New York City Dept. of Soc. Serv., 217 A.D.2d 413, lv denied 87 N.Y.2d 812). Moreover, plaintiff failed to allege that defendants in some way wrongfully utilized process to gain an advantage collateral to its legitimate ends (id.).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Bonarco, Ltd. v. Cossington Overseas LTD

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 9, 2000
269 A.D.2d 158 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Bonarco, Ltd. v. Cossington Overseas LTD

Case Details

Full title:BONARCO, LTD., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COSSINGTON OVERSEAS LTD., et al.…

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

Date published: Feb 9, 2000

Citations

269 A.D.2d 158 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
703 N.Y.S.2d 26

Citing Cases

Hammond v. Equinox Holdings LLC

Further, "the gist of the action for abuse of process lies in the improper use of process after it is issued"…