Volgstadt v. Jamestown Scrap Corp.

207 A.D.2d 966, 616 N.Y.S.2d 830
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 30, 1994·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted part of plaintiff’s motion to compel disclosure. Because plaintiff must prove malice, he is entitled to disclosure of evidence of defendants’ knowledge and motivation at the time the alleged defamatory statements were made (see, Mansour v Abrams, 144 AD2d 905; see generally, Freeman v Johnston, 84 NY2d 52; Liberman v Gelstein, 80 NY2d 429). The court also properly denied defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment (see, CPLR 3212 [f]; Blue Bird Coach Lines v 107 Delaware Ave., 125 AD2d 971; see also, Mansour v Abrams, supra). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Chautauqua County, Gerace, J.—Discovery.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Callahan and Davis, JJ.

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

Volgstadt v. Jamestown Scrap Corp., 207 A.D.2d 966, 616 N.Y.S.2d 830 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

207 A.D.2d 966 (Volgstadt v. Jamestown Scrap Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Krusen v. Moss
2019 NY Slip Op 5733 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)