From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Forsythe v. Durham

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 3, 1936
200 N.E. 674 (N.Y. 1936)

Opinion

Argued January 29, 1936

Decided March 3, 1936

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

Lewis E. Mosher and Sherman Moreland for appellant.

John D. O'Loughlin and J. Laning Taylor for respondent.


In this action for slander defendant is principal of a high school and plaintiff was a student therein. Defendant's duty required him to communicate to the Board of Education the fact that rumors concerning plaintiff were circulated among the students and teachers. In so acting he was protected by a qualified privilege and is free from liability unless his conduct resulted from malice. That there was no actual malice is conceded. There is no evidence that defendant acted with a wanton and reckless disregard of plaintiff's rights or otherwise than in good faith. ( Pecue v. West, 233 N.Y. 316, 322, 323.)

The judgment of the Appellate Division and that of the Trial Term should be reversed and the complaint dismissed, with costs in all courts.

CRANE, Ch. J., LEHMAN, O'BRIEN, HUBBS, CROUCH, LOUGHRAN and FINCH, JJ., concur.

Judgments reversed, etc.


Summaries of

Forsythe v. Durham

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 3, 1936
200 N.E. 674 (N.Y. 1936)
Case details for

Forsythe v. Durham

Case Details

Full title:ERMA FORSYTHE, an Infant, by RAY FORSYTHE, Her Guardian ad Litem…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 3, 1936

Citations

200 N.E. 674 (N.Y. 1936)
200 N.E. 674

Citing Cases

Teichner v. Bellan

Qualified privilege is an affirmative defense to be pleaded and proved by the defendant ( Ostrowe v. Lee, 256…

Nunan v. Bullman

The defendant, however, claims immunity from liability on the ground that because of the occasion these…