Legal Opinion
Hills v. Press Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided January 15, 1924PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtStaley, J.
The defendant moves for judgment, pursuant to section 476 of the Civil Practice Act, and contends that such judgment is warranted by plaintiff’s pleading. The complaint sets forth seven separate causes of action for libel. It contains no allegations of special damage.
The test of the sufficiency of the pleading to constitute a cause of action must, therefore, be determined by the character of the publication and whether it is actionable per se or whether under any reasonable construction it will convey the meaning ascribed to it by the innuendo pleaded thereunder. Crashley v. Press Publishing…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Triggs v. Sun Printing & Publishing Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1904
- Crashley v. . Press Publishing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1904
- Bennet v. . Commercial Advertiser Assn.New York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Rossiter v. New York Press Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
3Cited by8 opinions
- Cole Fisher Rogow, Inc. v. Carl Ally, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1968
- Berg v. Printers' Ink Pub. Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1943
- Robinson v. WarrenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1930
- Golson v. Hearst CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1954
- Hills v. Press Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.