Gilligan v. King

29 A.D.2d 935, 290 N.Y.S.2d 1014, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4171
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 25, 1968·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Order entered October 27, 1965, denying motion of defendant-appellant William Epton to dismiss the complaint, sounding in libel, unanimously affirmed, without costs or disbursements, with leave to renew the motion, if defendant-appellant is so advised, after joinder of issue and the completion of pretrial disclosure procedures. While a majority of the court are agreed that the rule announced in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (376 U. S. 254) is applicable to this case, the present record does not lend itself to summary disposition of the issue of actual malice. Concur — Botein, P. J., Eager, Capozzoli and MeGivem, JJ; Stevens, J., concurs in the following memorandum: I concur. The motion here is pursuant to CPLR 3211 (subd. [a], par. 7) only. Since the basis of plaintiff’s action lies in a claimed injury to his character in the opinion of others, pretrial disclosure proceedings might well involve examination of plaintiff as to whether and under what circumstances plaintiff has ever been involved in other homicides, and what, if any, public reaction was manifested in connection therewith. [48 Misc 2d 212.]

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

Gilligan v. King, 29 A.D.2d 935, 290 N.Y.S.2d 1014, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4171 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

29 A.D.2d 935 (Gilligan v. King) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Malerba v. Newsday, Inc.
64 A.D.2d 623 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1978)
Tague v. Citizens for Law & Order, Inc.
75 Cal. App. Supp. 3d 16 (Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California, 1977)