Ben-Oliel v. Press Pub. Co.
| Decision Date | 11 July 1929 |
| Citation | 251 N.Y. 250,167 N.E. 432 |
| Parties | BEN-OLIEL v. PRESS PUB. CO. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Action by Florence Elizabeth Ben-Oliel against the Press Publishing Company. From a judgment (217 App. Div. 743, 216 N. Y. S. 801) dismissing the amended complaint as insufficient, and from certain intermediate orders, plaintiff appeals.
Judgments reversed, and motion to dismiss complaint denied.
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First department.
E. Jean Nelson Penfield, of New York City, for appellant.
Charles B. Brophy, of New York City, for respondent.
This is an action for libel. The amended complaint has been dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. It alleges the following:
First. It alleges the plaintiff's occupation and profession. She is a professional lecturer, writer, and teacher, specializing on the life and social customs of Palestine and Mosaic symbolism, sometimes designated, ‘The Symbolism of the Tabernacle.’ Out of this work she makes her living. Her livelihood is dependent upon her reputation as an authority on these subjects. In other words, this allegation in the complaint has the same legal force and effect as if it alleged that the plaintiff was a lawyer or a physician or scientist whose livelihood depended upon his standing in the community for skill, ability, and integrity.
The complaint alleges, in connection with the plaintiff's profession as a lecturer and writer on these subjects, that she enjoyed a wide reputation for learning, historical integrity, accuracy, and for trustworthiness in the presentation of facts. She is a Chautaqua lecturer on the life in Palestine. She lectures in the churches throughout this country and Canada on the customs and the social practices and spiritual teaching under the Mosaic law. Her lectures and writings embody the result of personal, scientific research and study.
Second. The defendant, a newspaper corporation, so the complaint alleges, published on the 15th day of April, 1923, an article in its paper purporting to have been written by the plaintiff. It states that the article is her article, which is false-she never wrote it. This article states her views upon the social customes of Palestine under the Mosaic law, which the plaintiff also alleges are false. The statement written by her is more than an expression of her views and opinions; it contains her assertion of scientific or sociological facts, statements of customs and habits which the plaintiff says are false and untrue and known to every person familiar with the life in Palestine or with the Mosaic law as being false and untrue. These habits and customs, which the defendant has published as facts stated by this plaintiff, relate to the Hebrew marriage and divorce, and the preparation or examination of the man and woman about to be united in wedlock. The article also contains a statement as a fact given by the plaintiff in relation to the ease with which divorce may be obtained. The plaintiff is published as having said: ‘After living many years in the Near East for the purpose of studying the real meanings of the Old Testament, and learning while there the customs and ideals and language of Palestine, I again affirm that they know perfect marriage and that we do not.’ There follows a statement regarding ‘The Symbolism of the Tabernacle’-‘true and yet idealistic teaching of social hygiene that makes marriage in the Holy Land perfect.’ There then follows a statement of how the young Jewish boy of 13 or 14 who has amassed a little money is prepared and examined for his bride, and likewise the methods of examination conducted upon the young girl who is about to take the young man for her husband. The description and wisdom of the matchmaker in Palestine in the examination of youths and maidens, that they may be properly mated, is then set forth: In this fashion the article continues. Without quoting more, the complaint alleges in substance that the plaintiff has stated, as of her knowledge, social customs and conditions regarding the ideal marriage and divorce in Palestine. She alleges in the complaint that these facts are absolutely false, ridiculous, and grotesque; that such customs and habits do not exist; that she never made such statements or wrote such an article and that the matters stated as facts are grossly false, and known to the defendant to be false.
Third. We now have in this complaint the plaintiff alleging herself to be a teacher and lecturer on life in Palestine and under Mosaic law; we have the defendant publishing an article ‘by Florence Ben-Oliel’ which refers to her experience in the Holy Land, and represents her as stating facts about life and customs there which are absolutely false and untrue; that no such social customs exist. And:
We now have the damage. The statement of these facts as coming...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Guitar v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation
...itself held plaintiff up to ridicule and contempt or injured him in his professional reputation. See Ben-Oliel v. Press Publishing Co., 251 N.Y. 250, 167 N.E. 432 (1929); D'Altomonte v. New York Herald Co., 154 App.Div. 453, 139 N.Y.S. 200 (1st Dep't), modified without opinion, 208 N.Y. 596......
-
Geisel v. Poynter Products, Inc.
...203 N.Y.S.2d 812, 168 N.E.2d 673 (1960) (false attribution of authorship of inaccurate book may be libelous); BenOliel v. Press Pub. Co., 251 N.Y. 250, 167 N.E. 432 (1929). That plaintiff is a distinguished artist and author is not disputed P.T.O.Stip. 6, 28-33. The Court, however, rejects ......
-
Julian v. American Business Consultants, Inc.
...Krug v. Pitass, 162 N.Y. 154, 56 N.E. 526 (doctor); Kleeberg v. Sipser, 265 N.Y. 87, 191 N.E. 845 (attorney); Ben-Oliel v. Press Pub. Co., 251 N.Y. 250, 167 N.E. 432 (lecturer); Bornmann v. Star Co., 174 N.Y. 212, 66 N.E. 723 (doctor). In all those cases the defamatory matter and the plaint......
-
Harms, Inc. v. Tops Music Enterprises, Inc., of Cal.
...414, 132 N.E. 133, 137, 19 A.L.R. 937; Packard v. Fox Film Corp., 1923, 207 App.Div. 311, 202 N.Y.S. 164; Ben-Oliel v. Press Publishing Co., 1929, 251 N.Y. 250, 167 N.E. 432, 434; Avon Periodicals Co. v. Ziff-Davis Publishing Co., 1953, 282 App.Div. 200, 122 N.Y.S. 2d The controlling questi......
-
E-law 4: Computer Information Systems Law and System Operator Liability
...of Torts § 558 (1989). 188. Id. § 559. 189. Id. § 559 cmt. d. 190. Id. § 569 cmt. e. 191. See, e.g., Ben-Oliel v. Press Publishing Co., 167 N.E. 432 (N.Y. 1929). This case involved a newspaper article on Palestinian art and custom which was mistakenly credited to the plaintiff, an expert in......
-
The Right to Say, "i Didn't Write That": Creating a Cause of Action to Combat False Attribution of Authorship on the Internet
...attributing his authorship to a mistake-laden edition of his book, for which the publisher was responsible); Ben-Oliel v. Press Pub. Co., 167 N.E. 432, 434 (1929) (holding that publishing a well-known author's name on a work that would damage her reputation was libel, and thus a newspaper w......