47 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 252,626 times 279 Legal Analyses
Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 266,542 times 365 Legal Analyses
Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.
418 U.S. 323 (1974) Cited 3,875 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that a private defamation plaintiff cannot recover punitive damages without proving actual malice
Dillon v. City of New York
261 A.D.2d 34 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999) Cited 855 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[d]efamation has long been recognized to arise from the making of a false statement which tends to expose the plaintiff to public contempt, ridicule, aversion or disgrace, or induce an evil opinion of him in the minds of right-thinking persons, and to deprive him of their friendly intercourse in society."
Liberman v. Gelstein
80 N.Y.2d 429 (N.Y. 1992) Cited 1,000 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding an interloper's statements to the party (potentially slanderous per se because "tend[ing] to injure [the counter-party] in his or her trade, business or profession") could subject the interloper to liability for tortious interference if the party declined to proceed with the transaction on that basis
Celle v. Filipino Reporter Enterprises
209 F.3d 163 (2d Cir. 2000) Cited 452 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that to recover in libel under New York law, the plaintiff must establish that the defamatory statement was, among other things, published to a third party through the defendant's negligence or actual malice
Biro v. Nast
883 F. Supp. 2d 441 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) Cited 144 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the use of the terms ‘shyster,’ ‘con man,’ and finding an ‘easy mark’ is the type of rhetorical hyperbole and ‘imaginative expression’ that is typically understood as a statement of opinion"
Pure Power Boot Camp, Inc. v. Warrior Fitness Boot Camp, LLC
813 F. Supp. 2d 489 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) Cited 140 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that defendants' violation of SCA was neither willful nor intentional because there was no basis to conclude that defendants were "aware of the statute, or knew that their conduct was otherwise unlawful"
Front, Inc. v. Khalil
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 1554 (N.Y. 2015) Cited 119 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the privilege afforded to pre-litigation communication "should only be applied to statements pertinent to good faith anticipated litigation."
Armstrong v. Simon Schuster
85 N.Y.2d 373 (N.Y. 1995) Cited 187 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that defendant's accusation that plaintiff suborned perjury "transcends narrow doctrine" of the single instance rule
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 345,805 times 922 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Giuffre v. Maxwell

47 Cited authorities

Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

Holding that a private defamation plaintiff cannot recover punitive damages without proving actual malice

Holding that to recover in libel under New York law, the plaintiff must establish that the defamatory statement was, among other things, published to a third party through the defendant's negligence or actual malice

Holding that "the use of the terms ‘shyster,’ ‘con man,’ and finding an ‘easy mark’ is the type of rhetorical hyperbole and ‘imaginative expression’ that is typically understood as a statement of opinion"

Holding that defendants' violation of SCA was neither willful nor intentional because there was no basis to conclude that defendants were "aware of the statute, or knew that their conduct was otherwise unlawful"

Holding that the privilege afforded to pre-litigation communication "should only be applied to statements pertinent to good faith anticipated litigation."

Holding that defendant's accusation that plaintiff suborned perjury "transcends narrow doctrine" of the single instance rule

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss