Case law

Duffy v. Kipers

26 A.D.2d 127 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 30, 1966

The Trial Justice charged the doctrine of qualified privilege, but made no reference to absolute privilege. Neither party took any exception nor made any request to charge. … Or as Professor Prosser put it: “privilege and truth—are complete defenses, avoiding all liability when they are established.” (Prosser, Torts [3d ed.], § 109, p. 795.)

Park Knoll Associates v. Schmidt

89 A.D.2d 164 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 18, 1982

A qualified privilege is * * * available only in the absence of malice, while an absolute privilege, a veritable immunity, is impervious to proof, and therefore to a charge, of malice (Andrews v Gardiner, 224 NY 440, 446 … The threshold question is whether, for the purposes of this analysis, the statements of complaint are subject to a privilege and, if so, whether it is an absolute or qualified privilege.

Sonne v. Board of Trustees of Village of Suffern

67 A.D.3d 192 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 29, 2009

defense of qualified immunity which applies if their conduct “ ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known’ ” (Pearson v Callahan, 555 US —, —, 129 … He established as a matter of law that, although he may have mistakenly violated the plaintiffs rights under the Village of Suffern Code in a good faith attempt to enforce village policy, he did not violate clearly established

Holder v. Jacob

2024 NY Slip Op 03864 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 18, 2024

, defendants' failure to conclusively establish the immunity statute's applicability, as written, that compels our conclusion. … None, however, has found that a defendant established its entitlement to immunity for the acts or omissions of a medical provider under the Executive Order, where it had not established entitlement to such immunity under

Belfand v. Petosa

2021 NY Slip Op 03522 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 3, 2021

Only the sovereign's own consent could qualify the absolute character of that immunity" ( Nevada v Hall , 440 US 410, 414 [1979]). … State sovereign immunity . . . is constitutionally protected. And in the context of federal sovereign immunity . . . it is well established that waivers are not implied.

Ryan v. Village of Lindenhurst, Inc.

151 A.D.3d 898 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 14, 2017

The defendants also asserted qualified immunity as a defense. … The Village moved for leave to reargue on the ground that the Supreme Court misapprehended the existence of meritorious defenses, including improper service of process, qualified immunity, and consent.

Belfand v. Petosa

2021 NY Slip Op 03522 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 3, 2021

Only the sovereign's own consent could qualify the absolute character of that immunity" ( Nevada v Hall , 440 US 410, 414 [1979]). … State sovereign immunity . . . is constitutionally protected. And in the context of federal sovereign immunity . . . it is well established that waivers are not implied.

Homere v. State

48 A.D.2d 422 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 10, 1975

George v State of New York, 283 App Div 245 , affd 308 NY 681 ), this rule does not constitute an inflexible grant of total immunity to the State in all situations. Indeed, in St. … Here, there is clearly "something more” which justifies the trial court’s ruling in favor of claimants. In view of Samuels’ past history, his treating psychiatrist, Dr.

Rothman v. Sternberg

207 A.D.2d 438 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 15, 1994

Moreover, there *441 is no First Amendment constitutional imperative that affords immunity to the defendant absent qualifying under the "opinion immunity doctrine”. … As a corollary to such protection, the opinion must be a valid opinion, not a camouflage for the utterance of clearly defamatory factual language.

Murphy v. Herfort

140 A.D.2d 415 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 9, 1988

The plaintiff further contests the defendant’s assertion of a qualified privilege and contends that, in any *416 event, he established that the defendant acted out of malice and uttered statements with knowledge of their … Communications protected by a qualified privilege do not provide the communicant with absolute immunity against the imposition of liability in an action sounding in defamation.

Dawoodi v. City of New York

2025 NY Slip Op 05498 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 8, 2025

In addition, Detective Varghese's actions were privileged under the doctrine of qualified immunity, as they were objectively reasonable ( see Boyd v City of New York , 149 AD3d 683, 686; Davila v City of New York , 139 AD3d … 890, 893), and his conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known ( see Davila v City of New York , 139 AD3d at 893).

Farooq v. Coffey

206 A.D.2d 879 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 15, 1994

Defendant established that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that there is no triable question of fact on the issue whether the statements were protected by a qualified privilege (see, Buckley … Similarly, two nearly identical statutes, Education Law § 6527 (5) and Public Health Law § 2805-m (3), provide for qualified immunity on the part of "any person * * * or * * * entity on account of the communication of information

Salonen v. Barbella

65 A.D.2d 753 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 6, 1978

It was established that a large percentage of newer church members failed to stay in Tarrytown for three months, the period of time necessary to establish a valid residency for *755 voting purposes. … The clear, unambiguous language of the statute affords a qualified privilege to one invoking the challenge, and renders one immune from civil liability to the extent that he has an articulable "reason to believe” such person

Iacampo v. State

267 A.D.2d 963 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 30, 1999

On this appeal, defendant contends that the evidence does not establish common-law negligence or a violation of Labor Law §§ 200 or 241 (6), that it is entitled to qualified immunity, and that the court’s allocation of liability … Defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity because its alleged negligence was not limited to a planning decision (see, Ernest v Red Cr. Cent.

Moskovitz v. City of New York

130 A.D.3d 991 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 29, 2015

The City moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint based on both qualified governmental immunity and governmental function immunity, and separately moved for leave to serve an amended answer that included those … Contrary to the City’s contention, it failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the basis of qualified governmental immunity.

Giske v. State

191 A.D.2d 675 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 29, 1993

The testimony presented at trial established that the State had been aware, at least since 1982, that similar accidents had occurred at the site of the decedent’s accident. … Although the State is accorded a qualified immunity from liability arising out of highway planning decisions, the doctrine of qualified immunity does not shield the State from liability where, as here, it has failed to demonstrate

People v. Parker

70 A.D.2d 387 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 30, 1979

We note to begin with that the record leaves something to be desired as to establishing the basic facts as to the license. … In a memorandum of law, however, defendant’s attorney qualifies this statement by saying that defendant possessed an on-premises license and a target license.

Schneider v. Hanasab

2019 NY Slip Op 8437 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 20, 2019

Contrary to the Town's contention, it failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the basis of qualified governmental immunity. … ), here, the doctrine of qualified immunity does not apply since the Town, by its submissions, "failed to establish that it undertook a study which entertained and passed on the question of risk that is at issue in this case

Boyd v. City of New York

149 A.D.3d 683 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 5, 2017

Further, the appellants established that Gomez’s actions were privileged under the doctrine of qualified immunity, as they were objectively reasonable (see Davila v City of New York, 139 AD3d at 893 ; Williams v City of New … York, 129 AD3d at 1067 ), and his conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known (see Davila v City of New York, 139 AD3d at 893 ; Hudson Val.

Rouse-Harris v. City of Schenectady Police Department

124 A.D.3d 1124 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 22, 2015

Following joinder of issue, defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, asserting that Derkowski was entitled to qualified immunity under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1104 because he was in pursuit of a suspect … "When an emergency vehicle, including a police vehicle, is involved in an emergency operation — such as pursuing an actual or suspected violator of the law — the driver of the emergency vehicle is entitled to qualified immunity