Foley v. Mobil Chemical Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court should have granted the motions of defendants Mast, Miller and Calle to dismiss plaintiffs causes of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. On February 23, 1993, plaintiff commenced an action against those and other defendants, alleging violations of the Human Rights Law (Executive Law art 15). Plaintiff alleged that defendants sexually harassed and discriminated against her. Summary judgment motions by Mast and Miller, who sought to dismiss…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Murphy v. American Home Products Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Howell v. New York Post Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1993
- Fischer v. MaloneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Leibowitz v. Bank Leumi Trust Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Burlew v. American Mutual InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Stuto v. FleishmanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
- Stuto v. FleishmanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
- Herlihy v. Metropolitan Museum of ArtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Chimarev v. TD Waterhouse Investor Services, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2003
- Dana v. Oak Park Marina, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.