Putnam v. Syracuse Newspapers, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Putnam v. Syracuse Newspapers, Inc.

243 A.D. 834

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

DecidedMarch 15, 1935

StatusPublished

This text of 243 A.D. 834 (Putnam v. Syracuse Newspapers, Inc.) 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

Putnam v. Syracuse Newspapers, Inc., 243 A.D. 834 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

The action is for libel. Plaintiff, a police officer in the village of Saranac Lake, was living with his wife and four children. Defendant published an article in its newspaper which plaintiff alleged charged him with the commission of adultery with a prisoner in the village jail and also charged that he was associating with dissolute and disorderly persons. Defendant pleaded the truth of the published article in full justification and also other facts in mitigation. There was no plea of privilege. By its verdict the jury found that the publication was untrue, and awarded plaintiff $6,000 as compensatory damages. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs to respondent. Present — Hill, P. J., Rhodes, Crapser, Bliss and Heffernan, JJ.

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

The action is for libel. Plaintiff, a police officer in the village of Saranac Lake, was living with his wife and four children. Defendant published an article in its newspaper which plaintiff alleged charged him with the commission of adultery with a prisoner in the village jail and also charged that he was associating with dissolute and disorderly persons. Defendant pleaded the truth of the published article in full justification and also other facts in mitigation. There was no plea of privilege. By its verdict the jury found that the publication was untrue, and awarded plaintiff $6,000 as compensatory damages. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs to respondent. Present — Hill, P. J., Rhodes, Crapser, Bliss and Heffernan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 A.D. 834, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/putnam-v-syracuse-newspapers-inc-nyappdiv-1935.