Majority
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for defamation, the defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golar, J.), dated June 4, 2004, as denied its motion to dismiss the amended complaint insofar as asserted by the plaintiff George Spanos.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
“Construing liberally the allegations of the [amended] complaint and the plaintiffs evidence submitted in opposition to the motion, and affording the [amended complaint’s] allegations every favorable inference, the plaintiff has alleged sufficient material facts to give rise to cognizable causes of action to recover damages for defamation” (Pankin v Cronin, 12 AD3d 492 , 493 [2004]; see Schermerhorn v Rosenberg, 73 AD2d 276 , 287 [1980]; Gambuzza v Time, Inc., 18 AD2d 351 , 353-354 [1963]; Shubert v Variety, Inc., 128 Misc 428 , 430 [1926], affd
Cases cited
- Schermerhorn v. Rosenberg 73 AD2d 276 at 287 p. 945
- Gambuzza v. Time, Inc. 18 AD2d 351 at 353-354 p. 945
- Shubert v. Variety, Inc. 128 Misc 428 at 430 p. 945
- Mondello v. Newsday, Inc. 6 AD3d 586 at 587 p. 946
- Cole Fisher Rogow, Inc. v. Carl Ally, Inc. 29 AD2d 423 at 426 p. 946
- Cole Fisher Rogow, Inc. v. Carl Ally, Inc. 25 NY2d 943 p. 946