Legal Opinion
Roche v. Hearst Corp.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided April 7, 1981PublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. Although some might characterize the articles in question as somewhat sensational, on the record before us *769we can find no triable issues of fact as to their literal falsity. Plaintiff’s complaint conclusorily alleges only that the implicated statements were “wholly false and without foundation”. His bill of particulars does little more than assert that if additional facts had been included in the articles and editorials there would have been a more balanced picture of the actual circumstances surrounding…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Rotuba Extruders, Inc. v. CepposNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Rinaldi v. Viking Penguin, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1981
3Cited by43 opinions
- Alvarez v. Prospect HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- GTF Marketing, Inc. v. Colonial Aluminum Sales, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1985
- Smith v. Johnson Products Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Kipper v. NYP Holdings Co.New York Court of Appeals · 2009
- Pizzi v. Bradlee's Division of Stop & Shop, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.