Court Opinion

ID: 5278624
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-06 21:48:33.531059+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:28:21.272076
License: Public Domain

Dowling, J.
(dissenting): I dissent and vote to reverse, upon the ground that the use of the word “ crook ” applied to an individual is slanderous per se. (See my dissenting opinion in Villemin v. Brown, 193 App. Div. 779. See, also, Pandolfo v. Bank of Benson, 273 Fed. 51, which expressly holds that the word “ crook ” when used with reference to human conduct of an individual is slanderous per se.) Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Settle order on notice.