From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clark v. MacKay

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 3, 1983
97 A.D.2d 394 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Opinion

October 3, 1983


In an action to recover damages for malicious prosecution, plaintiffs appeal from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Vitale, J.), dated February 22, 1983, which granted defendants-respondents' motion to dismiss the complaint against them and (2) a judgment of the same court entered thereon on March 4, 1983. Appeal from the order dismissed (see Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248). Judgment affirmed. Respondents are awarded one bill of costs. To the extent that the action was against the attorneys for David MacKay, Jr., it failed to state a cause of action. (See Drago v Buonagurio, 46 N.Y.2d 778. ) As to defendant David MacKay, Jr., a necessary element of an action for malicious prosecution of a civil proceeding is that the original proceeding caused interference with the person or property of the defendant therein. The failure to allege such interference requires dismissal of the complaint as to MacKay. (See Williams v Williams, 23 N.Y.2d 592, 596.) Weinstein, J.P., Bracken, Rubin and Boyers, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Clark v. MacKay

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 3, 1983
97 A.D.2d 394 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)
Case details for

Clark v. MacKay

Case Details

Full title:SAMUEL CLARK, JR., et al., Appellants, v. DAVID MACKAY, JR., et al.…

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

Date published: Oct 3, 1983

Citations

97 A.D.2d 394 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Citing Cases

Greco v. Christoffersen

Moreover, the mere commencement of a lawsuit cannot serve as the basis for a cause of action alleging abuse…