From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Litras v. Litras

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 19, 1998
254 A.D.2d 395 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

October 19, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Fredman, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is modified by deleting so much of the first through fourth decretal paragraphs thereof as awarded the plaintiffs damages and costs; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Westchester County, for a new trial on the issue of damages only, with costs to abide the event.

Although an independent cause of action for civil conspiracy is not recognized in this State ( see, Plymouth Drug Wholesalers v. Kirschner, 239 A.D.2d 479), a plaintiff may plead the existence of a conspiracy in order to connect the actions of the individual defendants with an actionable, underlying tort and establish that those actions were part of a common scheme ( see, Alexander Alexander v. Fritzen, 68 N.Y.2d 968; American Preferred Prescription v. Health Mgt., 252 A.D.2d 415; Smukler v. 12 Lofts Realty, 156 A.D.2d 161; see also, Brackett v. Griswold, 112 N.Y. 454).

Here, the plaintiffs alleged in the complaint, inter alia, that the individual defendants committed certain torts. The sixth cause of action alleged that the defendants conspired to commit those torts as part of a common scheme to destroy the plaintiffs' business. The verdict sheet reveals that the jury found that each of the three individual defendants and the defendant Dahill Funeral Home committed one of the underlying torts specified in the complaint, and that all of the defendants conspired to commit such tortious acts as part of a scheme to destroy the plaintiffs' business. Accordingly, the defendants were jointly and severally liable for any compensatory and punitive damages awarded for the underlying torts.

The defendants failed to allege any ground for setting aside the jury's verdict on the issue of liability, and the jury's findings of fact through question six of the verdict sheet are affirmed. There must be a new trial on the issue of damages, however, as the verdict sheet improperly permitted the jury to award compensatory and punitive damages as if the conspiracy were an independent tort.

We have considered the defendants' remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.

O'Brien, J. P., Thompson, Santucci and McGinity, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Litras v. Litras

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 19, 1998
254 A.D.2d 395 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Litras v. Litras

Case Details

Full title:BASIL G. LITRAS et al., Respondents, v. JOHN G. LITRAS et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Oct 19, 1998

Citations

254 A.D.2d 395 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
681 N.Y.S.2d 545

Citing Cases

Sepenuk v. Marshall

See Sado v. Ellis, 882 F. Supp. 1401, 1408 (S.D.N Y 1995). If an underlying, actionable tort is established,…

Matter of Kings County Tobacco Litigation

Thus in a case in which fraudulent misrepresentation and concealment are alleged and the evidence makes out a…