Case Name: Max Loewinthan, Appellant, v. Beth David Hospital et al., Defendants, and Charles Loventhal et al., Defendants-Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1943-04-08
Citations: 290 N.Y. 188
Docket Number: 
Parties: Max Loewinthan, Appellant, v. Beth David Hospital et al., Defendants, and Charles Loventhal et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 290
Pages: 188–190

Head Matter:
Max Loewinthan, Appellant, v. Beth David Hospital et al., Defendants, and Charles Loventhal et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Submitted March 2, 1943;
decided April 8, 1943.
B. Leo Schwarz and Sidney M. Wittner for appellant.
David J. Rosen for respondents.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The complaint should not have been dismissed as against these defendants-respondents. Their communications were protected by a qualified privilege but plaintiff's proof made out a prima facie case of malice. (Ashcroft v. Hammond, 197 N. Y. 488.) The question was for the jury.
The judgments should be reversed and a new trial granted with costs to abide the event.
Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ., concur.
Judgments reversed, etc.