From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Frommer v. Abels

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 20, 1993
193 A.D.2d 513 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

May 20, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carmen B. Ciparick, J.).


The IAS Court properly concluded that the complained of statements were not actionable. In separating protected opinion from actionable fact, a court must look at "`the content of the whole communication, its tone and apparent purpose'" (600 W. 115th St. Corp. v Von Gutfeld, 80 N.Y.2d 130, 145, quoting Immuno AG. v Moor-Jankowski, 77 N.Y.2d 235, 254). Plaintiff, a travel industry specialist, had published columns criticizing travel agents for unnecessarily steering their clients towards preferred suppliers and advising consumers to avoid agents who fail to pass on their share of inflated commissions. Defendants' statements, in their entire context, published in its travel industry trade publication, could only be reasonably interpreted by subscribers as spirited advocacy for the role of travel agents.

Concur — Carro, J.P., Milonas, Wallach, Kassal and Nardelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Frommer v. Abels

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 20, 1993
193 A.D.2d 513 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Frommer v. Abels

Case Details

Full title:ARTHUR FROMMER, Appellant, v. JOEL M. ABELS et al., Respondents, et al.…

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

Date published: May 20, 1993

Citations

193 A.D.2d 513 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
598 N.Y.S.2d 185

Citing Cases

U.S. Conway v. Kaplan

Defendant's criticisms signal to readers that it is an opinion because it is a statement that cannot be…

Penn Warranty v. Digiovanni

Moreover, in the context of statements pertaining to issues of consumer advocacy, courts have been loathe to…