Cubides v. Bridge to Spiritual Freedom, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cubides v. Bridge to Spiritual Freedom, Inc.

271 A.D.2d 568, 707 N.Y.S.2d 341, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4318

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 17, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 271 A.D.2d 568 (Cubides v. Bridge to Spiritual Freedom, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cubides v. Bridge to Spiritual Freedom, Inc., 271 A.D.2d 568, 707 N.Y.S.2d 341, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4318 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for defamation, the defendants Bridge to Spiritual Freedom, Inc., and Rebecca Ann Laycock appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.), entered June 11, 1999, as granted that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was to dismiss the allegations contained in paragraph 29 of the first counterclaim asserted against the plaintiff Angela Cubides.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly determined that the complained-of portion of the letter sent by the plaintiff Angela Cubides, dated July 6, 1998, was absolutely privileged (see, O’Brien v Alexander, 898 F Supp 162, 170-171, affd 101 F3d 1479; Friedman v Alexander, 79 AD2d 627, 628). O’Brien, J. P., Thompson, S. Miller and H. Miller, 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 defamation, the defendants Bridge to Spiritual Freedom, Inc., and Rebecca Ann Laycock appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.), entered June 11, 1999, as granted that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was to dismiss the allegations contained in paragraph 29 of the first counterclaim asserted against the plaintiff Angela Cubides.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly determined that the complained-of portion of the letter sent by the plaintiff Angela Cubides, dated July 6, 1998, was absolutely privileged (see, O’Brien v Alexander, 898 F Supp 162, 170-171, affd 101 F3d 1479; Friedman v Alexander, 79 AD2d 627, 628). O’Brien, J. P., Thompson, S. Miller and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 568, 707 N.Y.S.2d 341, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4318, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cubides-v-bridge-to-spiritual-freedom-inc-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack