Farmelant v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Farmelant v. City of New York

187 A.D.2d 281, 590 N.Y.S.2d 411, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12603

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

DecidedNovember 5, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 187 A.D.2d 281 (Farmelant v. City of New York) 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

Farmelant v. City of New York, 187 A.D.2d 281, 590 N.Y.S.2d 411, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12603 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eugene Nardelli, J.), entered May 13, 1992, which, inter alia, granted the defendants’ cross-motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the amended complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court properly dismissed the plaintiff’s pro se amended complaint for failure to state a cause of action pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) and for failure to meet the pleading and notice requirements needed to maintain a cause of action for defamation set forth in CPLR 3016 (a) because of the plaintiff’s failure to set forth the particular words complained of in her cause of action for slander (Gardner v Alexander Rent-A-Car, 28 AD2d 667). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman and Kassal, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eugene Nardelli, J.), entered May 13, 1992, which, inter alia, granted the defendants’ cross-motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the amended complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court properly dismissed the plaintiff’s pro se amended complaint for failure to state a cause of action pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) and for failure to meet the pleading and notice requirements needed to maintain a cause of action for defamation set forth in CPLR 3016 (a) because of the plaintiff’s failure to set forth the particular words complained of in her cause of action for slander (Gardner v Alexander Rent-A-Car, 28 AD2d 667). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

187 A.D.2d 281, 590 N.Y.S.2d 411, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12603, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farmelant-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack