Case Name: Morris H. Hofstadter, Appellant, v. Alexander Bienstock, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1925-03
Citations: 213 A.D. 807
Docket Number: 
Parties: Morris H. Hofstadter, Appellant, v. Alexander Bienstock, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 213
Pages: 807–807

Head Matter:
First Department,
March, 1925.
Morris H. Hofstadter, Appellant, v. Alexander Bienstock, Respondent.
Libel and slander — not slanderous per se to call professional man “ a crook.”
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the New York county clerk’s office July 18, 1924, granting defendant’s motion under rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice for judgment dismissing the complaint upon the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
The order should be affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to the respondent, upon the authority of the majority opinion in Villemin v. Brown (193 App. Div. 777). The complaint in the ease at bar does not allege that the alleged slanderous word was applied to the plaintiff in his profession. Present — Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Merrell, McAvoy and Burr, JJ.; Dowling, J., dissents in memorandum.