Legal Opinion · Dissent

Stukuls v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 22, 1976No. Claim No. 59376Published

1Dissent

Mahoney, J. (dissenting).

We dissent.

The sole issue is whether an acting president of a State University College is entitled to a defense of absolute privilege in an action for defamation relating to statements made within the scope of his official duties.

The defense of absolute privilege has a conservative history in this State. Traditionally, and without dissent, New York courts have extended it to judicial, legislative and high-level executive personnel whose duties require implementation and discharge of official State or municipal functions. In Sheridan v Crisona (14 NY2d 108, 113), the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Barr v. MatteoSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  2. Cheatum v. WehleNew York Court of Appeals · 1959
  3. Lombardo v. StokeNew York Court of Appeals · 1966
  4. Sheridan v. CrisonaNew York Court of Appeals · 1964
  5. Duffy v. KipersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1966

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API