
    Simmie Priester, Respondent, v. R. F. H. Realty Corp. et al., Appellants.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
    June 17, 1958.
    
      Edward A. Segal for appellants.
    
      Michael Lifschutz for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

Defendants, having terminated plaintiff’s employment, had the right to evict him. Notice given by certified mail was received by the plaintiff. The eviction did not constitute a conversion of plaintiff’s goods; neither did the subsequent storage of them in the basement. (Bowers, Law of Conversion, § 3, p. 3.) The loss or damage, if any, caused by flood was accidental and did not constitute conversion. (Salt Springs Nat. Bank v. Wheeler, 48 N. Y. 492, 495; Magnin v. Dimsmore, 70 N. Y. 410, 417.)

The judgment should be unanimously reversed upon the law, without costs, and complaint dismissed, with appropriate costs in the court below.

Concur — Pette, Hart and Brown, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.  