Opinion
2012-03-29
Matthew PRINCE, Individually and on Behalf of D'Lites L.A.M.D. B.H. Inc., Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC., et al., Defendants–Appellants.
Hogan Lovells U.S. LLP, New York (Katherine M. Bolger of counsel), for appellants. Napoli Bern Ripka Shkolnik, LLP, New York (Adam Julien Gana of counsel), for respondents.
Hogan Lovells U.S. LLP, New York (Katherine M. Bolger of counsel), for appellants. Napoli Bern Ripka Shkolnik, LLP, New York (Adam Julien Gana of counsel), for respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol R. Edmead, J.), entered November 23, 2011, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendants' motion to dismiss the defamation claim of plaintiff D'Lites L.A.M.D. B.H. Inc. and the product disparagement claim of plaintiffs relating to a D'Lites ice cream store in Babylon, New York, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of dismissing the product disparagement claim in connection with damages for lost customers, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff D'Lites L.A.M.D. B.H. Inc. sustained its burden of pleading that the alleged defamatory consumer report produced and broadcast by defendants was “of and concerning” plaintiff ( see Giaimo v. Literary Guild, 79 A.D.2d 917, 434 N.Y.S.2d 419 [1981]; see generally Golden Bear Distrib. Sys. v. Chase Revel, Inc., 708 F.2d 944 [5th Cir.1983] ).
Plaintiffs' product disparagement claim should have been dismissed to the extent it seeks damages in connection with lost customers, as plaintiffs failed to plead such special damages with the requisite specificity ( see Drug Research Corp. v. Curtis Publ. Co., 7 N.Y.2d 435, 440–441, 199 N.Y.S.2d 33, 166 N.E.2d 319 [1960]; Christopher Lisa Matthew Policano, Inc. v. North Am. Precis Syndicate, 129 A.D.2d 488, 490, 514 N.Y.S.2d 239 [1987] ).