Sone v. Park

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sone v. Park

34 A.D.3d 783, 823 N.Y.S.2d 920

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

DecidedNovember 28, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 34 A.D.3d 783 (Sone v. Park) 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

Sone v. Park, 34 A.D.3d 783, 823 N.Y.S.2d 920 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for defamation, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Winslow, J.), dated August 4, 2005, which granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5) and (7).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5) and (7). The allegations contained in the complaint either are time-barred (see CPLR 3211 [a] [5]; 215 [3]; Frederick v Fried, 10 AD3d 444, 445 [2004]; Kwarren v American Airlines, 303 AD2d 722 [2003]) or fail to state a cause of action (see CPLR 3211 [a] [7]).

The plaintiffs remaining contentions are without merit. Adams, J.E, Krausman, Rivera and Lifson, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for defamation, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Winslow, J.), dated August 4, 2005, which granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5) and (7).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5) and (7). The allegations contained in the complaint either are time-barred (see CPLR 3211 [a] [5]; 215 [3]; Frederick v Fried, 10 AD3d 444, 445 [2004]; Kwarren v American Airlines, 303 AD2d 722 [2003]) or fail to state a cause of action (see CPLR 3211 [a] [7]).

The plaintiffs remaining contentions are without merit. Adams, J.E, Krausman, Rivera and Lifson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

34 A.D.3d 783, 823 N.Y.S.2d 920, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sone-v-park-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack