Order affirmed, with costs. The plaintiff has failed to state any evidentiary facts, warranting a trial, to support its allegation that the defendant was motivated by malice in publishing its critique of the plaintiff's restaurant. (See, e.g., Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, Inc.,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
TWENTY-FIVE E. 40TH ST. REST. CORP. v. FORBES, INC.
30 N.Y.2d 595 (1972)
Twenty-Five East 40th Street Restaurant Corporation, Appellant, v. Forbes, Inc., Respondent.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued February 17, 1972.
Decided March 15, 1972.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL, JASEN and GIBSON.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.