From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tufano v. Schwartz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 27, 1983
95 A.D.2d 852 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Opinion

June 27, 1983


In a libel action, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roncallo, J.), entered July 12, 1982, which denied his motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. Order reversed, on the law, with costs, and motion to dismiss granted. The statement by defendant to Newsday that the cabinets built and installed by plaintiff were a "total misfit", was merely an expression of dissatisfaction with plaintiff's performance. As such, it was not libelous per se ( Fink v. Horn Constr. Co., 58 A.D.2d 574). Plaintiff's failure to allege special damages in the complaint, therefore, requires dismissal for failure to state a cause of action (see Ruder Finn v. Seaboard Sur. Co., 52 N.Y.2d 663, 670). Damiani, J.P., Thompson, Bracken and Rubin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Tufano v. Schwartz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 27, 1983
95 A.D.2d 852 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)
Case details for

Tufano v. Schwartz

Case Details

Full title:LOUIS TUFANO, Respondent, v. STEVEN SCHWARTZ, Appellant

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

Date published: Jun 27, 1983

Citations

95 A.D.2d 852 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Citing Cases

Sandler v. Marconi Circuit Tech. Corp.

The threshold issue is whether the statement is an expression of fact or mere opinion. Parks v. Steinbrenner,…

Protic v. Dengler

law and therefore not actionable. This view is supported, moreover, by cases which have considered analogous…