From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kleiman v. Beech-Nut Packing Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 31, 1940
259 App. Div. 593 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)

Summary

In King (supra) referring to "the claim of the defendants" the court stated the applicable rule as follows: "One of the objects of a bill of particulars is to ascertain the facts — not as they actually exist, but as the party from whom the bill is sought will claim them to be when called upon to prove his cause of action".

Summary of this case from McLure v. Greco

Opinion

May 31, 1940.

Appeal from Supreme Court of Bronx County, LEVY, J.

Chester Bordeau of counsel [ White Case, attorneys], for the appellant.

Philip Prosk, for the respondents.

Present — MARTIN, P.J., TOWNLEY, DORE, COHN and CALLAHAN, JJ.


The gravamen of a cause of action for slander is the utterance of defamatory matter in the hearing of at least one person. The complaint here charges that the defamatory matter was uttered "in the presence and hearing of divers persons including agents and representatives of firms with whom plaintiffs had been dealing and with whom they had good credit * * *." In view of this allegation defendant is entitled to know the names of the persons plaintiffs claim heard the defamatory matter.

The order appealed from should be modified by granting item 1 in full, and as so modified affirmed, without costs.


Order, so far as appealed from, unanimously modified by granting item 1 in full, and as so modified affirmed, without costs. Verified bill of particulars to be served within ten days after service of order.


Summaries of

Kleiman v. Beech-Nut Packing Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 31, 1940
259 App. Div. 593 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)

In King (supra) referring to "the claim of the defendants" the court stated the applicable rule as follows: "One of the objects of a bill of particulars is to ascertain the facts — not as they actually exist, but as the party from whom the bill is sought will claim them to be when called upon to prove his cause of action".

Summary of this case from McLure v. Greco

In Kleiman (supra) because the action was for slander and the gravamen of such an action is the utterance of a defamatory statement within the hearing of at least one person, the court held that defendant was entitled to know the name of the person in whose presence the alleged defamatory statements were made.

Summary of this case from McLure v. Greco
Case details for

Kleiman v. Beech-Nut Packing Co.

Case Details

Full title:MORRIS KLEIMAN and Others, Copartners, Doing Business under the Firm Name…

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

Date published: May 31, 1940

Citations

259 App. Div. 593 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)
20 N.Y.S.2d 196

Citing Cases

Segel v. Barnett

The gravamen of slander is the utterance of the defamatory matter before at least one such person. Where, as…

Romer v. Portnick

An indispensable element for slander is the communication of the defamation to at least one person other than…