Opinion
January 17, 1985
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.).
In order to recover counsel fees and punitive damages in circumstances such as are here presented, it must be shown that malice was the gravamen of the defendant's actions and that there was an intentional effort to inflict economic injury upon the plaintiffs by forcing them to engage legal counsel. Those damages must be shown to "have been proximately related to the malicious acts and the acts themselves must have been entirely motivated by a disinterested malevolence on [defendant's] part (59 N.Y. Jur, Torts, § 25)" ( United Pickle Co. v. Omanoff, 63 A.D.2d 892, 893). Viewing the pleadings in a light most favorable to plaintiffs ( Rovello v. Orofino Realty Co., 40 N.Y.2d 633), the allegations of the complaint fall far short of demonstrating actual malice and that defendants acted with disinterested malevolence, intentionally seeking to inflict economic injury on plaintiffs by forcing them to engage legal counsel. ( United Pickle Co. v Omanoff, supra; Mastic Fuel Serv. v. Cook, 55 A.D.2d 599.)
Similarly, the complaint herein fails to allege, let alone demonstrate, that defendants' conduct was of such a continuous and systematic nature, aimed at the public generally, as would justify an award of punitive damages. As we recently said in Samovar of Russia Jewelry Antique Corp. v. Generali, Gen. Ins. Co ( 102 A.D.2d 279, 282): "We have consistently adhered to the standard of Walker v. Sheldon ([ 10 N.Y.2d 401], supra) in rejecting claims for punitive damages unless there is a showing of wanton dishonesty as to imply a criminal indifference to civil obligations — morally culpable conduct directed at the general public, a public as opposed to a mere private wrong. The principle has been adopted by the Court of Appeals ( Halpin v Prudential Ins. Co., 48 N.Y.2d 906, supra) and has been consistently followed in this Department ( Royal Globe Ins. Co. v Chock Full O'Nuts Corp., 86 A.D.2d 315; Cook v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 97 A.D.2d 731; Holoness Realty Corp. v. New York Prop. Ins. Underwriting Assn., 75 A.D.2d 569; Cohen v. New York Prop. Ins. Underwriting Assn., 65 A.D.2d 71; Kleiner v. Jefferson Life Ins. Co., 63 A.D.2d 636; John C. Supermarket, Inc. v. New York Prop. Ins. Underwriting Assn., 60 A.D.2d 807; Marvex Processing Finishing Corp. v. Allendale Mut. Ins. Co., 60 A.D.2d 800, affg 91 Misc.2d 683)."
It is clear that such wrong as may have been committed by the defendants was no more than a private wrong for which no recovery of punitive damages may be had ( Garrity v. Lyle Stuart, Inc., 40 N.Y.2d 354).
Concur — Sandler, J.P., Ross, Asch and Milonas, JJ.