Rouadi v. New York Evening Journal, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rouadi v. New York Evening Journal, Inc.

255 A.D. 794, 7 N.Y.S.2d 58, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5358

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

DecidedOctober 14, 1938

StatusPublished

This text of 255 A.D. 794 (Rouadi v. New York Evening Journal, 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

Rouadi v. New York Evening Journal, Inc., 255 A.D. 794, 7 N.Y.S.2d 58, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5358 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action for libel the published article set forth in brief that the plaintiff, with another, was under arrest and in jail in connection with the murder of an alleged counterfeiter and racketeer and that the body of the murdered man had been buried in the plaintiff’s cellar prior to being transported to Lawrence, Mass., for permanent burial. The article is libelous per se. The answer set up a first defense that the publication was true. It then proceeded to give facts, many of which were immaterial to the charge and none of which justified the conclusion that the plaintiff was arrested and jailed, charged with the crime; or that the body was buried in plaintiff’s cellar or otherwise concealed by him. The justification was not, in respect to material facts and substance, as broad as the charge. The plaintiff moved to strike out the first defense and the first partial defense. The motion was denied. As to the first partial defense, the counsel abandoned that part of the motion on the appeal. Order modified by granting the motion to strike out the first defense, and as so modified affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to appellant, with leave to defendant to serve an amended answer within ten days from the entry of the order hereon. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Davis and Johnston, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action for libel the published article set forth in brief that the plaintiff, with another, was under arrest and in jail in connection with the murder of an alleged counterfeiter and racketeer and that the body of the murdered man had been buried in the plaintiff’s cellar prior to being transported to Lawrence, Mass., for permanent burial. The article is libelous per se. The answer set up a first defense that the publication was true. It then proceeded to give facts, many of which were immaterial to the charge and none of which justified the conclusion that the plaintiff was arrested and jailed, charged with the crime; or that the body was buried in plaintiff’s cellar or otherwise concealed by him. The justification was not, in respect to material facts and substance, as broad as the charge. The plaintiff moved to strike out the first defense and the first partial defense. The motion was denied. As to the first partial defense, the counsel abandoned that part of the motion on the appeal. Order modified by granting the motion to strike out the first defense, and as so modified affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to appellant, with leave to defendant to serve an amended answer within ten days from the entry of the order hereon. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Davis and Johnston, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 A.D. 794, 7 N.Y.S.2d 58, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5358, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rouadi-v-new-york-evening-journal-inc-nyappdiv-1938.