Ghartey v. Davidson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ghartey v. Davidson

192 A.D.2d 304, 595 N.Y.S.2d 691

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 1, 1993·Published

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carmen Ciparick, J.), entered June 20, 1991, granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment was properly granted in the absence of proof of malice sufficient to overcome the qualified privilege under which the employee evaluation was prepared (see, Trails W. v Wolff, 32 NY2d 207, 221). Nor did plaintiff adduce any proof that any of the statements in issue were uttered negligently. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Carro, Ellerin, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carmen Ciparick, J.), entered June 20, 1991, granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment was properly granted in the absence of proof of malice sufficient to overcome the qualified privilege under which the employee evaluation was prepared (see, Trails W. v Wolff, 32 NY2d 207, 221). Nor did plaintiff adduce any proof that any of the statements in issue were uttered negligently. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Carro, Ellerin, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.

Ghartey v. Davidson, 192 A.D.2d 304, 595 N.Y.S.2d 691 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

192 A.D.2d 304 (Ghartey v. Davidson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related