Disputes between neighbors may begin with something relatively insignificant and then escalate quickly and dramatically, leading, at times, to name-calling and hurt feelings on one or both sides of the dispute. Although civil lawsuits may be filed after such an unfortunate escalation, it is worthwhile to know the limits of what may be achieved in a court of law in the State of New York when one neighbor says things – maybe even nasty things — about another neighbor.
An appellate court recently issued a decision affirming a court order that, among other things, dismissed a complaint seeking damages for (i) defamation per se, (ii) defamation, (iii) harassment, and (iv) intentional infliction of emotional distress. See Gregory P. Scialdone v. John DeRosa, Jr., et al., 2017 NY Slip. Op. 01582 (App. Div. 2d Dep’t, Mar. 1, 2017). In Scialdone, the plaintiff — who is an attorney in the State of New York and who represented himself, pro se, in the appeal – was “a resident of an apartment complex owned and operated by the defendants . . . .” Id. According to the appellate court: “This action, and several others, arose out of a dispute over the plaintiff’s claim to entitlement to a third parking space at the [apartment] complex.” Id. (emphasis added).
In the plaintiff’s complaint, the plaintiff alleged that the defendants had defamed him by sending to various people — including friends and relatives, some of whom are the individual defendants — a letter regarding the parking space dispute. Id. The letter described the plaintiff as “quixotic,” “self-absorbed,” “narcissistic,” “ungrateful,” and “delusional,” and the letter also referred to the plaintiff as a “paranoid pompous ass.” Id.
In response to the plaintiff’s complaint, the defendants made their respective motions to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint. Id. The Supreme Court of the State of New York, Westchester County (Jamieson, J.), by of way various orders, granted the defendants’ respective motions to dismiss. Id. On appeal, the appellate court affirmed the orders dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint. Id.
The appellate court began its analysis by stating certain fundamental principles applicable to pre-answer motions arguing that the plaintiff’s complaint fails to state any legally cognizable cause of action upon which relief may be granted. Id. First, the courts must accept as true all facts alleged in the plaintiff’s complaint. Id. Second, the courts must afford the plaintiff’s complaint a liberal construction. Id. Third, the courts must give the plaintiff the benefit of every possible inference that may be drawn from the allegations set forth in the complaint. Finally, the courts must determine “only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory.” Id. (emphasis added; citations omitted).
Applying these well-settled procedural principles, the appellate court swiftly affirmed the orders dismissing the plaintiff’s claims in his complaint. With regard to the plaintiff’s causes of action seeking damages for defamation per se, the appellate court determined that “none of the alleged per se defamatory statements stated that the plaintiff had committed a serious crime or suffered from a ‘loathsome disease’” or “was a statement that would tend to injure the plaintiff in his trade, business, or profession.” Id. (citation omitted). With regard to the plaintiff’s claims seeking damages for defamation, the appellate court determined that “a reasonable reader would have concluded that the statements constituted expression of opinion, which are not actionable, rather than statements of fact, which are.” Id. (emphasis added; citations omitted). With regard to the plaintiff’s claims seeking damages for harassment, the appellate court noted that the State of New York “does not recognize a common-law cause of action alleging “‘harassment.’” Id. (citations omitted). Finally, with regard to plaintiff’s claim seeking damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress, the appellate court determined that the plaintiff’s complaint did not allege conduct “so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.” Id. (citations omitted)
COMMENTARY:
Residing in an apartment complex with a relatively limited number of amenities – such as parking spaces – may lead to various disputes between neighbors or between one or more of the residents and the management/owner of the apartment complex. In this case, a dispute over a parking space escalated when a letter containing unflattering remarks about one party – who is an attorney practicing law in the State of New York – was circulated to various people, at least some of whom apparently were not involved directly in the parking space dispute. While it is understandable why an attorney might be very upset about being referred to as a “paranoid pompous ass” and also being described as “quixotic,” “self-absorbed,” “narcissistic,” “ungrateful,” and “delusional,” the appellate court in Gregory P. Scialdone v. John DeRosa, Jr., et al., 2017 NY Slip. Op. 01582 (App. Div. 2d Dep’t, Mar. 1, 2017), was unwilling to expand the existing law so as to determine that the plaintiff’s complaint sufficiently alleged facts demonstrating that the attorney had any legally cognizable claims arising from the letter.
Before disputes between neighbors lead to personal animosities, escalations, and expensive and time-consuming litigation, competent legal advice should be sought.
___________________________
Kenneth Allen Brown (kabrown@kabrownlawfirm.com) is an experienced land use, real property, and commercial litigator, with over twenty-five years of experience. He focuses on the following areas of law in the State of New York: Boundary Disputes, Water Boundaries and Riparian Rights, Land Use and Zoning Litigation, Real Property Litigation, Easement Litigation, and Commercial Litigation, including Partnership, Corporate, and Limited Liability Company Disputes. He is available to consult with potential clients regarding disputes between neighbors in the State of New York.
