Case Name: Stanley S. Groggins and Another, Respondents, v. Daily Mirror, Inc., Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1934-04
Citations: 241 A.D. 818
Docket Number: 
Parties: Stanley S. Groggins and Another, Respondents, v. Daily Mirror, Inc., Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 241
Pages: 818–818

Head Matter:
Stanley S. Groggins and Another, Respondents, v. Daily Mirror, Inc., Appellant.

Opinion:
Order denying defendant's motion to dismiss the second cause of action reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, with ten dollars costs, with leave to defendant to answer within ten days from the entry of the order herein. The second cause of action is insufficient in law. (Kimmerle v. New York Evening Journal, 262 N. Y. 99, 102; Sydney v. MacFadden Newspaper Pub. Corp., 242 id. 208, 214; Wellman v. Sun Printing & Pub. Assn., 66 Hun, 331, 344.) According to-the allegations of the complaint, the article does not touch the reputation of the lawyer in his profession, and is not otherwise libelous per se as to him. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Hagarty, Carswell and Davis, JJ., concur.