Legal Opinion

Pearlstein v. Draizin

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 4, 1947PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBenvenga, J.

This is a motion to strike two causes of action from a complaint on the ground that they fail to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

The plaintiff is a female. The action is for slander. The first cause of action charges defendants with having said of the plaintiff, “ What can you expect of a reformatory bum? the second, with having said, “ She is a bum; she is a tramp.” The well-settled rule in actions for slander is that the words complained of are to be taken and understood in that sense which is most natural and obvious and according to the ideas they are intended to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hemmens v. . NelsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
  2. Rovira v. BogetNew York Court of Appeals · 1925
  3. Desanto v. DenicolaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
  4. Outcault v. New York Herald Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Jordan v. LewisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1964
  2. Hewitt v. WasekNew York Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Goodstein v. Chalfonte Hotel Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Rizzo v. ZuckerNew York Supreme Court · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API