Summary
The New York Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed the dismissal of a teacher’s libel action against a newspaper and related defendants. The court held that the amended complaint adequately alleged false and defamatory statements imputing professional misconduct, and that the defendants’ documentary evidence did not conclusively establish the truth of the publications or resolve disputed factual issues.
Holdings
- The amended complaint stated a legally cognizable libel claim because the article and editorial accused the plaintiff of misconduct in the course of his employment and the plaintiff alleged that the defamatory statements were false.
- Dismissal under CPLR 3211(a)(1) was improper because defendants' documentary evidence did not conclusively establish the truth of the article's and editorial's material assertions or resolve all factual issues as a matter of law.
Questions Presented
- Whether the amended complaint adequately pleaded a legally cognizable libel claim under CPLR 3211(a)(7).
- Whether defendants' documentary evidence conclusively established the truth defense and required dismissal under CPLR 3211(a)(1).
Disposition
reversed
Cases Cited (15)
- Brian v. Richardson, 87 N.Y.2d 46, 50-51 (1995)(followed)
- Rinaldi v. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 42 N.Y.2d 369, 379, 383 (1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 969 (1977)(followed)
- Kotowski v. Hadley, 38 A.D.3d 499, 500 (2007)(followed)
- Gjonlekaj v. Sot, 308 A.D.2d 471, 473-474 (2003)(followed)
- Wasserman v. Haller, 216 A.D.2d 289 (1995)(followed)
- Gruen v. County of Suffolk, 187 A.D.2d 560, 562 (1992)(followed)
- Guggenheimer v. Ginzburg, 43 N.Y.2d 268, 275 (1977)(followed)
- Fleming v. Kamden Props., LLC, 41 A.D.3d 781 (2007)(followed)
- Martin v. New York Hosp. Med. Ctr. of Queens, 34 A.D.3d 650 (2006)(followed)
- M. Fund, Inc. v. Carter, 31 A.D.3d 620, 621 (2006)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 15.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…