Case Name: Pamela J. Howell et al., Appellants, v. New York Post Company, Inc., et al., Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1993-07-09
Citations: 82 N.Y.2d 690
Docket Number: 
Parties: Pamela J. Howell et al., Appellants, v New York Post Company, Inc., et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 82
Pages: 690–692

Head Matter:
[619 NE2d 650, 601 NYS2d 572]
Pamela J. Howell et al., Appellants, v New York Post Company, Inc., et al., Respondents.
Argued February 17, 1993;
decided July 9, 1993
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Schiavetti, DeVito, Begos & Nicholson, New York City (Padraic D. Lee, Lori Ann Maraño, Jacqueline Mandell and Peter Brown of counsel), for appellants.
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan, New York City (Laurence Greenwald, William A. Rome and Randy L. Shapiro of counsel), for respondents.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division insofar as it pertains to defendant New York Post Co., Inc., should be affirmed, with costs.
Subsequent to oral argument, the Post filed a chapter 11 bankruptcy petition, and thus the appeal with respect to that defendant was stayed and our opinion applied only to the individual defendants (Howell v New York Post Co., 81 NY2d 115, 118, n 1 [Apr. 5, 1993]). By order dated May 20, 1993, the Bankruptcy Court lifted the automatic stay for purposes of permitting this Court to render a decision with respect to the Post. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in our Opinion of April 5, we now affirm as to the corporate defendant.
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur; Judge Smith taking no part.
Order, insofar as it pertains to defendant New York Post Company, Inc., affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.