Stukuls v. State
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
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
- Barr v. MatteoSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Cheatum v. WehleNew York Court of Appeals · 1959
- Lombardo v. StokeNew York Court of Appeals · 1966
- Sheridan v. CrisonaNew York Court of Appeals · 1964
- 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.