Opinion

Hoo v. forest Pharmaceuticals Inc.

  • 225 A.D.2d 504
  • 639 N.Y.2d 693
  • 639 N.Y.S.2d 693
  • 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3261
Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Filed
Mar 28, 1996
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

There should be preaction disclosure to aid in bringing an action including a claim for defamation, petitioner having alleged facts sufficient to establish a prima facie case therefor except for the requirement of CPLR 3016 (a) that the particular words complained of be set forth, as to which the documents sought would clearly be helpful. The opposition to the motion failed to demonstrate, as a matter of law, either the existence of a qualified privilege or the absence of malice. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.