Opinion
June 20, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.).
The motion court correctly held that the article published in defendant newspaper was a substantially accurate report of the decision it published on the case of Matter of Posner (Central Synagogue) (NYLJ, Oct. 28, 1993, at 28, col 6, affd 202 A.D.2d 284, lv dismissed 83 N.Y.2d 953), and therefore privileged under Civil Rights Law § 74 ( Holy Spirit Assn. v. New York Times Co., 49 N.Y.2d 63, 67). The minor inaccuracies in the article cited by plaintiff do not make it otherwise ( see, supra, at 68; Gurda v Orange County Publs. Div., 56 N.Y.2d 705, revg on opn below 81 A.D.2d 120, 133; Ford v. Levinson, 90 A.D.2d 464). Nor was the cartoon that accompanied the article anything other than commentary, albeit hyperbolic, on a subject of public controversy, and, as such, constitutionally protected opinion ( see, DRT Constr. Co. v. Lenkei, 176 A.D.2d 1229, 1230, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 753; Velez v. VV Publ. Corp., 135 A.D.2d 47, 52, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 808). The complaint was utterly without merit, and costs were properly assessed by the motion court.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Milonas, Wallach, Ross and Nardelli, JJ.