Belanich v. Brophy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Belanich v. Brophy

255 A.D.2d 411, 680 N.Y.S.2d 852, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12389

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 16, 1998·Published

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for slander, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), entered September 25, 1997, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $150,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendants’ contentions, the trial court correctly refused to charge the jury that the subject defamatory remarks were made under a qualified privilege (see, Liberman v Gelstein, 80 NY2d 429, 437; Wright v Johnson, 184 AD2d 234; Hollander v Cayton, 145 AD2d 605; La Scala v D’Angelo, 104 AD2d 930), or that the plaintiff was a limited-issue public figure (see, James v Gannett Co., 40 NY2d 415, 422; Park v Capital Cities Communications, 181 AD2d 192, 197; Wilsey v Saratoga Harness Racing, 140 AD2d 857).

The damages awarded were not excessive. Miller, J. P., Pizzuto, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—In an action to recover damages for slander, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), entered September 25, 1997, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $150,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendants’ contentions, the trial court correctly refused to charge the jury that the subject defamatory remarks were made under a qualified privilege (see, Liberman v Gelstein, 80 NY2d 429, 437; Wright v Johnson, 184 AD2d 234; Hollander v Cayton, 145 AD2d 605; La Scala v D’Angelo, 104 AD2d 930), or that the plaintiff was a limited-issue public figure (see, James v Gannett Co., 40 NY2d 415, 422; Park v Capital Cities Communications, 181 AD2d 192, 197; Wilsey v Saratoga Harness Racing, 140 AD2d 857).

The damages awarded were not excessive. Miller, J. P., Pizzuto, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Belanich v. Brophy, 255 A.D.2d 411, 680 N.Y.S.2d 852, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12389 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

255 A.D.2d 411 (Belanich v. Brophy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related