Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lombardo v. Stoke

New York Court of Appeals

Decided November 29, 1966Published

1DissentScileppi, J.

While I agree that the Board of Higher Education of the City of New York had a qualified privilege to issue the statement involved in this case, I do not agree that they had an absolute privilege. Fnrthermore, it is my opinion that this case is easily distinguishable from Sheridan v. Crisona (14 N Y 2d 108).

The nature and duties of a public executive determine whether absolute privilege may be accorded him (Sheridan v. Crisona, supra; Prosser, Torts [3d ed., 1964], § 109). In Crisona we were dealing with an individual who was a municipal executive, the Borough President of Queens County and a…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Barr v. MatteoSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  2. Hamilton v. . EnoNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
  3. Moyle v. FranzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1944
  4. Moyle v. FranzNew York Court of Appeals · 1944

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API