Pickholz v. First Boston, Inc.

202 A.D.2d 277, 608 N.Y.S.2d 659
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 15, 1994·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered May 20, 1993, which denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the defamation cause of action alleged in plaintiffs’ third amended complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The third amended complaint’s cause of action for defamation is not time barred since it merely expands upon and relates back to the defamation claims made in the first, timely amended complaint (CPLR 203 [f]; see, Kaplan v K. Ginsburg, Inc., 8 AD2d 726). Moreover, the defamation causes of action were pleaded with sufficient specificity (CPLR 3016 [a]).

We have considered all other issues and find them to be meritless. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Asch, Rubin, Williams and Tom, JJ.

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

Pickholz v. First Boston, Inc., 202 A.D.2d 277, 608 N.Y.S.2d 659 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

202 A.D.2d 277 (Pickholz v. First Boston, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brummer v. Wey
2020 NY Slip Op 05846 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Cox v. Prudential Found., Inc.
2018 NY Slip Op 8756 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Kandell v. Saunders
224 A.D.2d 185 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
A to Z Associates v. Cooper
215 A.D.2d 161 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)