Judge Alison Nathan
Lesesne performed plastic surgeries on Brimecome in 2008. Although initially happy, Brimecome became dissatisfied with the results and purportedly began a campaign where she and her husband lied about Lesesne and his practice, and made false reports to New York’s Office of Professional Misconduct. The court dismissed Lesesne’s suit alleging tortious interference with contract, business relations, prospective business relations, and economic advantage. The bulk of Lesesne’s tortious interference claims sounded in defamation and were inadequately pleaded. Further, even if construed as claims for tortious interference rather than defamation, Lesesne’s claims were inadequately pleaded and subject to dismissal. For example, contrary to Lesesne’s assertion that his allegations were sufficient under Leadsinger v. Cole, the court found Lesesne’s position contrary to the weight of authority requiring that a plaintiff identify potential customers at issue when asserting a cause of action for interference with prospective economic advantage. The court also held that New York Public Health Law §230(11)(b) does not create an implied right of action for bad-faith or malicious reporting to the state board.
