Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Harold David SIMONS, etc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sandra C. KATZ, Esq., Defendant-Respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered on or about November 3, 1997, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by plaintiff's brief, granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The allegedly defamatory statement, contained in a letter written by defendant, an attorney, while representing a client in a partition action against plaintiff, to a nonparty tenant occupying the apartment owned by plaintiff and defendant's client, and not otherwise published, that “[i]t appears that [plaintiff] has merely been pocketing your rental payments”, was clearly an expression of fact. Viewed in the context of the rest of the letter (see, Brian v. Richardson, 87 N.Y.2d 46, 51, 637 N.Y.S.2d 347, 660 N.E.2d 1126), the truth of the assertion that plaintiff was diverting the payments was essential to the point of the letter that the tenant send future rent payments to defendant for deposit into an escrow account. However, as defendant made the statement in furtherance of her representation of her client and therefore enjoyed a qualified privilege (see, Toker v. Pollak, 44 N.Y.2d 211, 219, 405 N.Y.S.2d 1, 376 N.E.2d 163), and plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact as to malice (see, Liberman v. Gelstein, 80 N.Y.2d 429, 437-439, 590 N.Y.S.2d 857, 605 N.E.2d 344), summary judgment dismissing the complaint was properly granted. We have considered plaintiff's other arguments and find them to be unavailing.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: January 07, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)