BRIAN M. FREEMAN v. MOIRA JOHNSTON, ET AL.
84 N.Y.2d 52, 637 N.E.2d 268, 614 N.Y.S.2d 377 (1994).
June 30, 1994
1 No. 127 (1994 NY Int. 124)
Decided June 30, 1994
_________________________________________________________________
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
in the New York Reports.
SMITH, J.:
In this action for defamation, the question is whether summary
judgment was correctly granted to defendant dismissing the complaint.
We agree with the Appellate Division that the evidence was
insufficient to allow a rational fact finder to find actual malice by
clear and convincing evidence.
This controversy arises from the publication of defendant Moira
Johnston's book, "Takeover: - The New Wall Street Warriors - The Men,
The Money, The Impact," chronicling recent contests in the world of
corporate takeovers. Plaintiff Brian Freeman, who brought this action
for defamation(n 1), was a financial advisor to the International
Association of Machinists (IAM), one of two unions(n 2) which took
part in negotiations over the future of Trans World Airlines (TWA).
The negotiations involved a battle between Carl Icahn and Frank
Lorenzo for control of TWA. In characterizing a critical meeting of
the TWA Board of Directors held on August 20, 1985, involving the
Icahn-Lorenzo struggle, defendant, in her book, made the following
statement concerning plaintiff:
Brian Freeman, the lawyer who represented the machinists,
compounded the threats of strike, warning that being sold into
bondage to Lorenzo would provoke night time trashing of airplanes
and other sabotage.
Although plaintiff was admittedly present at that meeting, he denied
having made the statement, claiming that it was false and defamatory
and conveyed that he "threatened, condoned and encouraged the likely
commission of acts of physical sabotage and other illegal actions" by
his clients.
Also present at the August 20 meeting were Harry Hoglander, an airline
pilot, veteran TWA employee and then Chairman of the Master Executive
SNIPPETS:
In this action for defamation, the question is whether summary judgment was correctly granted
We agree with the Appellate Division that the evidence was insufficient to allow a rational
This controversy arises from the publication of defendant Moira Johnston's book, "Takeover: -
The negotiations involved a battle between Carl Icahn and Frank Lorenzo for control of TWA.
In characterizing a critical meeting of the TWA Board of Directors held on August 20, 1985,
Brian Freeman, the lawyer who represented the machinists, compounded the threats of strike,
Although plaintiff was admittedly present at that meeting, he denied having made the
Hoglander, who was interviewed by Johnston, recalled that the statement accurately portrayed
At Supreme Court, defendant moved for summary judgment, alleging that plaintiff failed to
The Appellate Division granted summary judgment dismissing the defamation claim, with one
The Appellate Division granted plaintiff's motion for leave to appeal to this Court.
A public official may not recover damages for defamation unless the official proves that the
Co., 71 NY2d 31, 39).
Co., 71 NY2d 31, 39, supra) including "the burden of showing the falsity of factual
On appeal in these cases, courts have a "constitutional duty to 'exercise independent
Plaintiff argues that here, as in Harte-Hanks, defendant received conflicting information,
The alleged conflict, according to plaintiff, is between Hoglander's account of plaintiff's
The statement by Freund that plaintiff considers in conflict with Hoglander's view is the
When determining if a genuine factual issue as to actual malice exists in a libel suit
The Airline Pilots Association was the other.
|
