Evans v. Punter

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed the dismissal of Paul Evans's defamation and libel per se claims on summary judgment. The court held that statements describing Evans as acting aggressively, disrespectfully, and unprofessionally were nonactionable opinions based on disclosed facts, and that qualified privilege also applied because the defendants reported his conduct to persons with a corresponding interest.

Holdings

1. The statements describing plaintiff as acting aggressively and being disrespectful and unprofessional were nonactionable expressions of opinion because they were based on disclosed facts.
2. Qualified privilege applied because defendants had a legitimate interest in reporting plaintiff's conduct at a public charity event to persons who had a corresponding interest, and plaintiff failed to show actual malice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether statements describing plaintiff as acting aggressively and being disrespectful and unprofessional were actionable defamation or libel per se.
2. Whether defendants' statements were protected by qualified privilege.
3. Whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Disposition

affirmed