Opinion
February 29, 2000
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gruner Gans, J.), entered September 15, 1999, which, inter alia, denied defendants' motion, in this defamation action, to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) and (7), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Richard L. Yellin, for Plaintiff-Respondent.
Edward H. Rosenthal, for Defendants-Appellants.
ROSENBERGER, J.P., MAZZARELLI, ELLERIN, RUBIN, ANDRIAS, JJ.
The motion court properly found defendants' statements regarding plaintiff to be "reasonably susceptible of a defamatory meaning" (Aronson v. Wiersma, 65 N.Y.2d 592, 593), and of a kind tending "to expose a person to hatred, contempt or aversion, or to induce an evil or unsavory opinion of him in the minds of a substantial number of the community" (Golub v. Enquirer/Star Group, Inc., 89 N.Y.2d 1074, 1076). Defendants' claim of privilege pursuant to Civil Rights Law § 74 was properly rejected, inasmuch as the allegedly defamatory passages were not a fair and true report of a judicial proceeding (Corporate Training Unlimited, Inc. v. Natl. Broadcasting Co., Inc., 868 F. Supp. 501, 508-509). We have reviewed defendants' remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.