Dalziel v. Press Publishing Co.
New York Supreme Court
Motion, in an action for libel, to strike out certain partial defenses as irrelevant and redundant. The opinion states the case.
1Opinion of the CourtO’Gorman, J.
Action for libel. Motion to strike out certain partial defenses as irrelevant and redundant. The prior publications in other newspapers appear to refer generally to the same incident, and, having been known to the defendant before the publication complained of, are relevant on the question of exemplary damages. Palmer v. Matthews, 162 N. Y. 102. That defendant’s article differs from the others in some respects does not make the latter any the less relevant. The discrepancies may properly be matter of comment before the jury, but do not in themselves make the articles inadmissible. The offer…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Mattice v. . WilcoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- Turton v. New York Recorder Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1894
- Dinkelspiel v. New York Evening Journal Publishing Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
- Slingerland v. NortonNew York Supreme Court · 1891
3Cited by3 opinions
- Fingerhut v. WeinerCity of New York Municipal Court · 1933
- Russo v. HowardNew York Supreme Court · 1926
- Irwin Co. v. Magazines of Industry, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1954