Sack v. New York Times Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sack v. New York Times Co.

270 A.D. 401, 59 N.Y.S.2d 888

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

DecidedFebruary 21, 1946

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 270 A.D. 401 (Sack v. New York Times 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

Sack v. New York Times Co., 270 A.D. 401, 59 N.Y.S.2d 888 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We are in accord with the ruling at Special Term that the article which was published by the defendant the New York Times Company is not libelous per se.

We do not believe, as asserted by the plaintiff in his brief, that the article charged him “ with being a defender and supporter of communism as a system, in all of its enumerated aspects: economic, political, cultural and religious. ’ ’ The writer of the article attacked Russian communism as such. Plaintiff wrote in part that “ Russian communism is not an insuperable barrier for mutual friendship between the two countries.” Of course the countries referred to were Russia and the United [403]*403States. The writer of the article complained of sought to set forth his views with reference to communism as a political theory. He in no way charged the plaintiff with being a communist or with having communistic beliefs.

We conclude, therefore, that the complaint was properly dismissed.

The order and the judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Martin, P. J., Townley, G-lennon, Cohn and Peck, JJ., concur.

Order and judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs.

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

Per Curiam.

We are in accord with the ruling at Special Term that the article which was published by the defendant the New York Times Company is not libelous per se.

We do not believe, as asserted by the plaintiff in his brief, that the article charged him “ with being a defender and supporter of communism as a system, in all of its enumerated aspects: economic, political, cultural and religious. ’ ’ The writer of the article attacked Russian communism as such. Plaintiff wrote in part that “ Russian communism is not an insuperable barrier for mutual friendship between the two countries.” Of course the countries referred to were Russia and the United [403]*403States. The writer of the article complained of sought to set forth his views with reference to communism as a political theory. He in no way charged the plaintiff with being a communist or with having communistic beliefs.

We conclude, therefore, that the complaint was properly dismissed.

The order and the judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Martin, P. J., Townley, G-lennon, Cohn and Peck, JJ., concur.

Order and judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D. 401, 59 N.Y.S.2d 888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sack-v-new-york-times-co-nyappdiv-1946.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack