Legal Opinion
Cohalan v. New York World-Telegram Corp.
New York Supreme Court
Decided November 25, 1939PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHammer, J.
Plaintiff has sued a newspaper publishing corporation and its editor because they have admittedly caused to be published on March 1, 1939, in the New York World-Telegram, a daily newspaper, an editorial entitled “ Cohalan Should Go,” which has special reference to him and is violative of his rights.
Defendants interposed denials and two affirmative defenses, one labeled “ separate,” and the other “ separate and partial.” Plaintiff now moves under rule 109 of the Rules of Civil Practice for an order striking out parts of the answer as redundant, irrelevant, prejudicial and evidentiary “ and…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Fleckenstein v. FriedmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1934
- Hamilton v. . EnoNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Bourjois Sales Corp. v. DorfmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
- Briarcliff Lodge Hotel, Inc. v. Citizen-Sentinel Publishers, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1932
- Hoeppner v. Dunkirk Printing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1930
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- O'Regan v. SchermerhornSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1946
- Morhous v. Plattsburgh Publishing Co.New York Supreme Court · 1954
- A. S. Abell Co. v. KirbyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1962
- J. Radley Metzger Co. v. New York Times Publishing Co.New York Supreme Court · 1958
- La Rocco v. Freedom of the Press Co.New York Supreme Court · 1943