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., 403 U. S. 29; New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U. S. 254; Frink v. McEldowney, 29 N Y 2d 720; Kent v. City of Buffalo, 29 N Y 2d 818.)
Twenty-Five East 40th Street Restaurant Corp. v. Forbes, Inc.
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Date filed: 1972-03-15
Citations: 30 N.Y.2d 595, 282 N.E.2d 118, 331 N.Y.S.2d 29, 1972 N.Y. LEXIS 1458
Copy CitationsLead Opinion