Legal Opinion
Broich v. McGann
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 14, 2012PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, the Supreme Court properly determined that the defendants demonstrated their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by establishing that the challenged statements were entitled to a qualified “common interest” privilege (Liberman v Gelstein, 80 NY2d 429, 437 [1992]; see Stukuls v State of New York, 42 NY2d *711272, 278-279 [1977]; Phelan v Huntington Tri-Vil. Little League, Inc., 57 AD3d 503, 504 [2008]; Golden v Stiso, 279 AD2d 607, 608 [2001]; Suozzi v Parente, 202 AD2d 94, 101 [1994]; ATN Marts v Ireland, 195 AD2d 959 [1993]), and a…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Liberman v. GelsteinNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- James v. Gannett Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Stukuls v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Silsdorf v. LevineNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Suozzi v. ParenteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bernacchi v. County of SuffolkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- Galanova v. SafirAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- Bernacchi v. County of SuffolkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014