§Why CasetextPricing

Kolchinsky v. Moody's Corporation et al

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 7 MOTION to Dismiss.. Document

11 Cited authorities

  1. Holy Spirit Assn v. N Y Times

    49 N.Y.2d 63 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 194 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding articles were substantially accurate even though they did not disclose the unverified nature of the information

  2. Long v. Marubeni America Corp.

    406 F. Supp. 2d 285 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)   Cited 41 times
    Holding that because Section 1981 is concerned only with discrimination on the basis of race, its implicit prohibition of retaliation against those who complain of discrimination is similarly limited to complaints of racial discrimination

  3. Sassower v. Finnerty

    96 A.D.2d 585 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)   Cited 56 times

    July 25, 1983 Appeal, as limited by the appellant's notice of appeal and brief, from stated portions of a judgment and order (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.), dated February 10, 1981, which (1) in action No. 2, inter alia, denied his motion for summary judgment and thereupon dismissed a writ of habeas corpus and (2) in action No. 3 granted the motion of the respondents Signorelli and Seidell pursuant to CPLR 3211 (subd [a], par 7) to dismiss appellant's amended complaint

  4. Moccio v. University

    09 Civ. 3601 (GEL) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 20, 2009)   Cited 14 times
    Granting motion to dismiss where, "[w]hatever the merit of [defendants'] argument, plaintiff has abandoned the . . . claim, as her motion papers fail to contest or otherwise respond to defendants' contention"

  5. Anyanwu v. Columbia Broadcasting System

    887 F. Supp. 690 (S.D.N.Y. 1995)   Cited 26 times
    Granting motion to dismiss intentional infliction of emotional distress claim because New York courts have held that a separate cause of action “for what are essentially defamation claims” should not be entertained

  6. Sassower v. N.Y

    48 A.D.3d 440 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)   Cited 9 times

    February 5, 2008. In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for defamation, the plaintiffs appeal from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Loehr, J.), entered July 6, 2006, which granted the defendants' motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaint and denied their cross motion, inter alia, for sanctions pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1, (2) a judgment of the same court dated August 1, 2006, which, upon the order entered July 6, 2006, is in favor of the defendants

  7. Hudson v. Goldman Sachs Co.

    304 A.D.2d 315 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)   Cited 11 times
    Affirming dismissal of plaintiff's defamation claim based on statements made by defendant in a newspaper article before defendant served its answer, where the statements were a substantially accurate description of defendant's position in the lawsuit

  8. The Savage Is Loose Co. v. United Artists Theatre Circuit, Inc.

    413 F. Supp. 555 (S.D.N.Y. 1976)   Cited 38 times

    No. 75 Civ. 1326. March 31, 1976. Arum, Friedman Katz, New York City, for plaintiffs; Theodore H. Friedman, David G. Miller, New York City, of counsel. Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen Katz, New York City, for defendants; Herbert M. Wachtell, Theodore Gewertz, Bertram M. Kantor, Robert B. Mazur, New York City, of counsel. LASKER, District Judge. The plaintiffs move for judgment on the pleadings or, in the alternative, summary judgment, dismissing the defendants' sixth and seventh affirmative defenses and

  9. El Meson Espanol v. NYM Corp.

    521 F.2d 737 (2d Cir. 1975)   Cited 20 times
    Holding that article identifying restaurant as "good place[] to meet" drug dealers did not defame owner where nothing in article suggested his knowledge that persons were congregating in restaurant for illicit purpose

  10. Briarcliff L. Hotel v. C.-S. Publishers

    260 N.Y. 106 (N.Y. 1932)   Cited 95 times
    Holding that a water board's demand letter is subject to the fair report privilege

  11. Section 74 - Privileges in action for libel

    N.Y. Civ. Rights Law § 74   Cited 397 times   4 Legal Analyses

    A civil action cannot be maintained against any person, firm or corporation, for the publication of a fair and true report of any judicial proceeding, legislative proceeding or other official proceeding, or for any heading of the report which is a fair and true headnote of the statement published. This section does not apply to a libel contained in any other matter added by any person concerned in the publication; or in the report of anything said or done at the time and place of such a proceeding