Hennigan v. Buffalo Courier-Express Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hennigan v. Buffalo Courier-Express Co.

91 A.D.2d 1170, 459 N.Y.S.2d 139, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16512

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

DecidedJanuary 21, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 91 A.D.2d 1170 (Hennigan v. Buffalo Courier-Express Co.) 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

Hennigan v. Buffalo Courier-Express Co., 91 A.D.2d 1170, 459 N.Y.S.2d 139, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16512 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order affirmed, with costs. All concur, Simons, J. P., not participating. Memorandum: In affirming, we note that although' the third affirmative defense has been stricken, no motion was made to strike the first affirmative defense. The first affirmative defense, if established, will place the burden upon the plaintiff to prove that the libelous statement was made with “actual malice” (New York Times Co. v Sullivan, 376 US 254, 279-280). Special Term properly refused to strike paragraphs 11 to 23 of the complaint. The publications referred to in those paragraphs were not pleaded as separate causes of action; they were properly pleaded “for the purpose of enlarging the scope of [the later libelous article], and making it more strong than it appears on its face.” (Cassidy v Brooklyn [1171]*1171Daily Eagle, 138 NY 239, 243.) (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Kuszynski, J. — strike affirmative defense.) Present — Simons, J. P., Callahan, Doerr, Boomer and Moule, JJ.

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

— Order affirmed, with costs. All concur, Simons, J. P., not participating. Memorandum: In affirming, we note that although' the third affirmative defense has been stricken, no motion was made to strike the first affirmative defense. The first affirmative defense, if established, will place the burden upon the plaintiff to prove that the libelous statement was made with “actual malice” (New York Times Co. v Sullivan, 376 US 254, 279-280). Special Term properly refused to strike paragraphs 11 to 23 of the complaint. The publications referred to in those paragraphs were not pleaded as separate causes of action; they were properly pleaded “for the purpose of enlarging the scope of [the later libelous article], and making it more strong than it appears on its face.” (Cassidy v Brooklyn [1171]*1171Daily Eagle, 138 NY 239, 243.) (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Kuszynski, J. — strike affirmative defense.) Present — Simons, J. P., Callahan, Doerr, Boomer and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 A.D.2d 1170, 459 N.Y.S.2d 139, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hennigan-v-buffalo-courier-express-co-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack