Summary
holding that plaintiff corrections officer did not assert special injury when she was the subject of disciplinary proceedings, eventually dropped and allegedly deficiently investigated, charging that she appeared in a pornographic video
Summary of this case from Zahrey v. City of New YorkOpinion
1069
May 14, 2002.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered March 12, 2001, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, granted defendants' motion to dismiss or for summary judgment, dismissing plaintiff's malicious prosecution cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Philip E. Taubman, for plaintiff-appellant.
George Gutwirth, for defendants-respondents.
Before: Nardelli, J.P., Saxe, Buckley, Sullivan, Gonzalez, JJ.
Defendant Department of Correction of the City of New York brought charges and specifications against plaintiff, a corrections officer, premised upon her alleged appearance in a pornographic video. It was later discovered that plaintiff did not appear in the video and the charges were ultimately not pursued. Plaintiff thereafter commenced this action alleging, inter alia, a cause of action for malicious prosecution against defendants based on their purportedly deficient investigation into the grounds for initiating the disciplinary proceeding against her.
The IAS court properly dismissed the malicious prosecution claim because plaintiff failed to allege special injury. She did not allege "concrete harm . . . considerably more cumbersome than the physical, psychological or financial demands of defending" the disciplinary proceeding (Engel v. CBS, Inc., 93 N.Y.2d 195, 205), or that she suffered "a highly substantial and identifiable interference with person, property or business" (id.; cf., Groat v. Town Bd. of the Town of Glenville, 73 A.D.2d 426, 429-430, appeal dismissed 50 N.Y.2d 928).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.