Legal Opinion

Lasky v. Kempton

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

Decided May 10, 1955PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

With paragraph “ 10 ” of the complaint, containing the innuendo, stricken from the complaint, the pleading must be read primarily from the allegedly libelous article alone. The article, written in a racy, hyperbolic style, is frequently cryptic in meaning, sometimes contradictory, and only dubiously suggestive of matters defaming plaintiff. Its meaning not being adequately clear, the necessity for a proper allegation of extrinsic fact or innuendo is evident. Moreover, while specific allegation of falsity is not necessary in a libel pleading (Seelman on Law of Libel and Slander, p. 393; ef. 53…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Lasky v. KemptonNew York Supreme Court · 1954

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bordoni v. New York Times Company, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1975
  2. Mt. Zion Baptist Church of Port Chester, Inc. v. BrownNew York Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Murray v. CassirerNew York Supreme Court · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API