Solow v. Herbert

66 A.D.2d 706, 411 N.Y.S.2d 538, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13984

This text of 66 A.D.2d 706 (Solow v. Herbert) 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
Solow v. Herbert, 66 A.D.2d 706, 411 N.Y.S.2d 538, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13984 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on July 28, 1978, affirmed for the reasons stated by Fraiman, J., at Special Term. Respondents shall recover of appellant $75 costs and disbursements of this appeal. Concur—Birns, J. P., Evans, Fein and Markewich, JJ.

Silverman, J., dissents in the following memorandum:

I would grant the motion to dismiss the complaint. In my view the allegedly defamatory statements were protected by the Federal doctrine of absolute privilege as being "within the outer perimeter of [defendant’s] line of duty” (Barr v Matteo, 360 US 564, 575; Savarirayan v English, 45 Ill App 3d 105).

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

Related

Barr v. Matteo
360 U.S. 564 (Supreme Court, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 A.D.2d 706, 411 N.Y.S.2d 538, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13984, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/solow-v-herbert-nyappdiv-1978.