TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Taylor v. American Export Lines, Inc.

Arthur Evans TAYLOR v. AMERICAN EXPORT LINES, INC., Harold E. Coffman, Joseph L. Handzel

Taylor v. Am. Export Lines, Inc., 222 F. Supp. 1022 (S.D.N.Y. 1963)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court, S.D. New York · Federal District Courts
Decided
October 3, 1963
Judges
Weinfeld
Citations
222 F. Supp. 10221963 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6676

Opinion of the Court — Weinfeld

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

WEINFELD, District Judge.

The first counterclaim of each defendant, insofar as it alleges he was falsely accused by plaintiff of committing an assault and battery, is sufficient to withstand the motion to dismiss. The accusation is broad enough to charge a serious law violation (e. g., 18 U.S.C. § 113 (1958)) and as such may be deemed slanderous per se (Roberts v. Rothstein, 32 Misc.2d 643 , 224 N.Y.S.2d 139 (1961)).

As to the charge that the defendants were drunk aboard ship, the authorities are clear that unless an allegedly defamatory statement is uttered of' and concerning one in his occupation or business, it is not slanderous per se and,, absent allegations of special damage, is not actionable (Gurtler v. Union Parts-Mfg. Co., 285 App.Div. 643 , 140 N.Y.S.2d 254 (2d Dep’t 1955), aff’d, 1 N.Y.2d 5 ,. 132 N.E.2d 889 , 150 N.Y.S.2d 4 (1956)).. While there are allegations that each defendant was serving as an officer aboard, the vessel, it is not clear that the words-“of being drunk” were uttered of him in his capacity as a ship’s officer. Hence,, this portion of the counterclaim is dismissed with leave, however, to serve an amended pleading within twenty (20) days hereof (see Torres v. Huner, 150 App.Div. 798 , 135 N.Y. Supp. 332 (2d Dep’t 1912); Goodstein v. Chalfonte Hotel Corp., 198 Misc. 1068 , 101 N.Y.S.2d 851 (1950); and Moran v. Singer, Sup., 75 N.Y.S.2d 874 (1947)).

As to the second counterclaim, which' charges plaintiff with libel in advancing the allegations in his complaint, the motion to dismiss is granted (Spieler v. Gottesman, 12 App.Div.2d 894, 210 N.Y. S.2d 102 (1st Dep’t 1961), aff’d, 11 N.Y. 2d 815 , 182 N.E.2d 110 , 227 N.Y.S.2d 437 (1962)).

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1969: 119692026peak 1969 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Beatty v. Ellings173 N.W.2d 12 (Minn. 1969)

Most recent

  1. Beatty v. Ellings173 N.W.2d 12 (Minn. 1969)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 6

DepthCaseCited by
Gurtler v. Union Parts Mfg. Co., 132 N.E.2d 889 (N.Y. 1956) 12
Gurtler v. Union Parts Mfg. Co., 285 A.D. 643 (1955) 37
Torres v. Huner, 150 A.D. 798 (1912) 11
Roberts v. Rothstein, 32 Misc. 2d 643 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1961) 3
Goodstein v. Chalfonte Hotel Corp., 198 Misc. 1068 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1950) 2
Spieler v. Gottesman, 182 N.E.2d 110 (N.Y. 1962) 2

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list