Opinion
237 CA 17–01764
04-27-2018
Federico C. GONZALEZ–DOLDAN, M.D., Plaintiff–Respondent, v. KALEIDA HEALTH, INC., Margaret Paroski, George Narby, Kevin J. Gibbons, John Koelmel, Stephanie Saunders and DeGraff Memorial Hospital, Defendants–Appellants.
HODGSON RUSS LLP, BUFFALO (CYNTHIA GIGANTI LUDWIG OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS–APPELLANTS. BROWN CHIARI LLP, BUFFALO (TIMOTHY M. HUDSON OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF–RESPONDENT.
HODGSON RUSS LLP, BUFFALO (CYNTHIA GIGANTI LUDWIG OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS–APPELLANTS.
BROWN CHIARI LLP, BUFFALO (TIMOTHY M. HUDSON OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF–RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, LINDLEY, DEJOSEPH, AND NEMOYER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Memorandum:
Plaintiff commenced this action asserting causes of action for, inter alia, defamation, tortious interference with business relations, and breach of fiduciary duty based on, among other things, plaintiff's suspension and the termination of his clinical privileges at defendant Kaleida Health, Inc. Defendants moved, as relevant to this appeal, to dismiss the complaint based on various grounds set forth in CPLR 3211, and Supreme Court denied the motion in part. We affirm. As a preliminary matter, we note that, since the entry of the order on appeal, plaintiff has voluntarily discontinued the action against defendants John Koelmel and Stephanie Saunders. We further note that plaintiff has also voluntarily discontinued against all defendants his causes of action based on negligent infliction of emotional distress and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ( 29 USC § 521 et seq. ).
Contrary to the contention of the remaining defendants, we conclude that the court providently exercised its discretion in denying the motion with respect to the remainder of the causes of action without prejudice to renew after discovery (see CPLR 3211[d] ; see generally Herzog v. Town of Thompson, 216 A.D.2d 801, 803, 628 N.Y.S.2d 869 [3d Dept. 1995] ).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.