Bonarco, Ltd. v. Cossington Overseas Ltd. — 269 A.D.2d 158

Majority

p. 158

Bonarco, Ltd., Appellant, v Cossington Overseas Ltd. et al., Respondents.

[703 NYS2d 26]

—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.

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 NY2d 113 ; Park v State of New York, 226 AD2d 153 ; Matthews v New York City

p. 159

Dept. of Social Servs., 217 AD2d 413 , lv denied 87 NY2d 812 ). Moreover, plaintiff failed to allege that defendants in some way wrongfully utilized process to gain an advantage collateral to its legitimate ends (supra). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Williams, Mazzarelli, Wallach and Lerner, JJ.

Cases cited

Curiano v. Suozzi 63 NY2d 113 N.Y. 1984-10-11 p. 158
Park v. State 226 AD2d 153 N.Y. App. Div. 1996-04-04 p. 158
Matthews v. New York City Department of Social Services 217 AD2d 413 N.Y. App. Div. 1995-07-06 p. 159