From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Benjar v. Ajo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 14, 1961
15 A.D.2d 466 (N.Y. App. Div. 1961)

Opinion

December 14, 1961


Order entered on April 4, 1961 denying defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings unanimously reversed on the law, with $20 costs and disbursements to appellants and the motion granted, with $10 costs. The action is in libel. The alleged libels are contained in an exchange of cables between defendants' New York office and their Frankfurt office. The cables concern a change of locks on the office door. They do not mention plaintiff by name or refer to him in any way. By way of innuendo plaintiff alleges that the cables were prompted by the termination of his connection with the defendants and therefore cast doubt on his honesty. Such a claim is beyond the province of an innuendo. The true function is to explain matter that is not sufficiently expressed ( Tracy v. Newsday, Inc., 5 N.Y.2d 134). Language clear in itself and not susceptible of a libelous meaning cannot be made so by innuendo ( Tracy v. Newsday, Inc., supra; O'Connell v. Press Pub. Corp., 214 N.Y. 352). Applying those tests, it is apparent that no cause of action is or can be stated.

Concur — Rabin, J.P., Valente, Stevens, Eager and Steuer, JJ.


Summaries of

Benjar v. Ajo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 14, 1961
15 A.D.2d 466 (N.Y. App. Div. 1961)
Case details for

Benjar v. Ajo

Case Details

Full title:WALTER BENJAR, Respondent, v. GUSTAVO AJO et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Dec 14, 1961

Citations

15 A.D.2d 466 (N.Y. App. Div. 1961)