KORN v. PRINCZ

The IAS Court properly characterized the allegations underlying the first cause of action as one for defamation and properly dismissed it as time-barred under the applicable one-year Statute of Limitations (CPLR 215 [3]). The complaint did not state a cause of action for tortious interference with prospective business relations, as plaintiff now asserts (see, WFB Telecommunications v NYNEX Corp., 188 A.D.2d 257, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 709), since there is no allegation that plaintiff was actually and wrongfully prevented from entering into or continuing in a specific business relationship (McGill v Parker, 179 A.D.2d 98, 105) as a result of defendants' conduct (Mandelblatt v Devon Stores, 132 A.D.2d 162, 169).