CAPELLAN v. MARSH

The complaint failed to state a cause of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress because the allegations fell far short of the atrocious conduct required to sustain such a claim, and it never expressed danger to — or fear for — Marisol Capellan's physical safety ( see Sheila C. v Povich, 11 AD3d 120, 130-131). The allegations of sexual harassment did not fit under any cognizable legal theory. Contrary to plaintiffs' assertion, no provision of the Executive Law — in particular, section 296 — applies to the situation set forth in the complaint.