Hofstadter v. Bienstock
213 A.D. 807
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 15, 1925·Published·Cited by 6 cases
Opinions
The order should be affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to the respondent, upon the authority of the majority opinion in Villemin v. Brown (193 App. Div. 777). The complaint in the ease at bar does not allege that the alleged slanderous word was applied to the plaintiff in his profession. Present — Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Merrell, McAvoy and Burr, JJ.; Dowling, J., dissents in memorandum.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hofstadter v. Bienstock, 213 A.D. 807 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1925).
213 A.D. 807 (Hofstadter v. Bienstock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Morrison v. National Broadcasting Co.
24 A.D.2d 284 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1965)
Dietrich v. Hauser
45 Misc. 2d 805 (New York Supreme Court, 1965)
Bruno v. Schukart
12 Misc. 2d 383 (New York Supreme Court, 1958)
Mishkin v. Roreck
202 Misc. 653 (New York Supreme Court, 1952)
Lendino v. Fiorenza
203 Misc. 115 (New York Supreme Court, 1952)
Weiner v. Leviton
230 A.D. 312 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1930)