From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

John Langenbacher Co., Inc. v. Tolksdorf

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 9, 1993
199 A.D.2d 64 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Summary

holding that statements that impugn "the basic integrity, creditworthiness and competence of the business" are defamatory per se

Summary of this case from Exec. Trim Constr. v. Gross

Opinion

December 9, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County, Barry Salman, J., Herbert Shapiro, J.


The complaint sufficiently set forth the words upon which the claims were based, which need not be in quotations (see, Taub v Amana Imports, 140 A.D.2d 687, 689). Further, "[o]n a bench trial, the decision of the fact-finding court should not be disturbed upon appeal unless it is obvious that the court's conclusions could not be reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence, especially when the findings of fact rest in large measure on considerations relating to the credibility of witnesses" (Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 A.D.2d 544, 544-545). Here, the evidence supported the court's finding that the decedent was spreading the word among architects, contractors and others in the business that after his departure from Langenbacher, the company would have financial problems, be operated by incompetents, and would be unable to fulfill its commitments as to quality and time. The award of general damages was not excessive and the court properly found that, as the disparagement impugned the basic integrity, creditworthiness and competence of the business, injury was presumed and no proof of special damages was required (see, Ruder Finn v Seaboard Sur. Co., 52 N.Y.2d 663, 670).

Contrary to defendant's contention, the record is barren of any evidence tending to establish that plaintiffs' affiliation constituted a restraint of trade in violation of General Business Law § 340. Further, the scope of the non-competition agreement executed by the decedent, a former owner in connection with the sale of his interest in the business was reasonable (see, Purchasing Assocs. v Weitz, 13 N.Y.2d 267, 271-272).

We have considered the parties' remaining claims and find them without merit.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Wallach and Asch, JJ.


Summaries of

John Langenbacher Co., Inc. v. Tolksdorf

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 9, 1993
199 A.D.2d 64 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

holding that statements that impugn "the basic integrity, creditworthiness and competence of the business" are defamatory per se

Summary of this case from Exec. Trim Constr. v. Gross
Case details for

John Langenbacher Co., Inc. v. Tolksdorf

Case Details

Full title:JOHN LANGENBACHER Co., INC., et al., Respondents-Appellants, v. SIMONE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 9, 1993

Citations

199 A.D.2d 64 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
605 N.Y.S.2d 34

Citing Cases

Van-Go Transport Co. v. New York City Board of Education

See November v. Time Inc., 13 N Y2d 175, 178, 244 N.Y.S.2d 309, 194 N.E.2d 126 (N.Y. 1963). In John…

AIM INTERNATIONAL TRADING, L.L.C. v. VALCUCINE S.p.A.

The words "need not be in quotations." Langenbacher Co. Inc. v. Tolksdorf, 605 N.Y.S.2d 34, 35 (App.Div.…