Haywood v. University of Rochester
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying that part of defendants’ motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal of plaintiff’s first cause of action, for defamation. The November 22, 1988 memorandum was protected by a qualified privilege (see, Clark v Somers, 162 AD2d 982, 983), and plaintiff did not demonstrate that its contents were so exaggerated, unjustified, or extravagant as to justify an inference of malice (cf., Watson v McClelland, 168 AD2d 389, lv denied 78 NY2d 854; Misek-Falkoff v…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Misek-Falkoff v. KellerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Amodei v. New York State Chiropractic Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Amodei v. New York State Chiropractic Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- Ferraro v. Finger Lakes Racing Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Clark v. SomersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Halegoua v. DoyleNew York Supreme Court · 1997