From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Muscarella v. Berkshire Hathaway, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 27, 2000
278 A.D.2d 854 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

December 27, 2000.

Appeals from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Sedita, Jr., J. — Summary Judgment.

PRESENT: HAYES, J. P., HURLBUTT, SCUDDER, KEHOE AND LAWTON, JJ.


Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: We agree with defendants that Supreme Court erred in denying their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendants made a fair and true report of the findings of a Department of Housing and Urban Development audit report, and thus the comments contained therein are privileged under Civil Rights Law § 74 ( see, Holy Spirit Assn. for Unification of World Christianity v. New York Times Co., 49 N.Y.2d 63, 68). In view of our determination, we do not consider the contention of plaintiff that he is not a public official. We have reviewed plaintiff's remaining contentions and conclude that they lack merit.


Summaries of

Muscarella v. Berkshire Hathaway, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 27, 2000
278 A.D.2d 854 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Muscarella v. Berkshire Hathaway, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL MUSCARELLA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT-RESPONDENT, v. BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY…

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

Date published: Dec 27, 2000

Citations

278 A.D.2d 854 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
721 N.Y.S.2d 432

Citing Cases

Fine v. ESPN, Inc.

Investigations of various types have been found to be official proceedings under § 74 and its predecessors.…