Skip to main content
S.D. New York· 8/9/2012

Biro v. Condé Nast

Citations

  • 883 F. Supp. 2d 441
  • 2012 WL 3234106
  • 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112466

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • providing that defendants cannot escape liability simply because they are conveying someone else’s defamatory statements without adopting those statements as their own
  • observing that, with respect to “fault,” a plaintiff must plead “either negligence or actual malice depending on the status of the libeled party”
  • explaining that “the [c]ourt [would] evaluate each allegedly defamatory statement (or set of statements
  • explaining that “the [c]ourt [would] evaluate each allegedly defamatory statement (or set of statements
  • finding significant that allegedly false and defamatory article “include[d] [plaintiff’s] responses to many of the accusations reported in the Article”
  • explaining that New York courts encourage the resolution of “defamation claims at the pleading stage, ‘so as not to protract litigation through discovery and trial and thereby chill the exercise of constitutionally protected freedoms’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Oetken

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

28 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

68 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.