Phelan v. Huntington Tri-Village Little League, Inc.
| Decision Date | 02 December 2008 |
| Docket Number | 2007-09509. |
| Citation | 2008 NY Slip Op 09576,868 N.Y.S.2d 737,57 A.D.3d 503 |
| Parties | JOHN PHELAN, Appellant, v. HUNTINGTON TRI-VILLAGE LITTLE LEAGUE, INC., et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff, a little league baseball coach, alleges that he was defamed by the defendants when the defendant John Zammillo, the umpire in chief of the defendant Huntington Tri-Village Little League, Inc. (hereinafter HTV), wrote a letter to the Director of the Huntington Department of Parks and Recreation (hereinafter the Director) complaining of, among other things, the plaintiff's "unacceptable and despicable language and behavior" at a little league baseball game while the plaintiff was attempting to eject two HTV affiliated teams from the field so that his non-HTV affiliated team could begin its game at the scheduled time. The plaintiff alleges that the letter constituted libel and/or libel per se because in addition to being a little league baseball coach, he is employed by the Town of Huntington, and the allegedly defamatory letter injured the plaintiff in his trade, business, and/or profession as it was sent to one of his supervisors, i.e., the Director. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants sent the letter in retaliation for his services to a more successful non-HTV affiliated little league team which was causing a diminution in HTV membership and revenue.
The defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground, inter alia, that the statements were privileged and not damaging to the plaintiff's integrity or reputation in his occupation. The plaintiff opposed the motion and cross-moved to compel discovery, arguing that he made sufficient allegations of malice to warrant further discovery on the issue and to thus preclude the granting of summary judgment.
The Supreme Court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment and denied the plaintiff's motion to compel discovery, finding, inter alia, that the defendants were entitled to a qualified privilege because Zammillo's statements were made to a group with whom he had a corresponding interest, and further that the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
THAI v. CAYRE GROUP
...Liberman v. Gelstein, 80 N.Y.2d 429, 437, 590 N.Y.S.2d 857, 605 N.E.2d 344 (1992)). 51See Phelan v. Huntington Tri-Village Little League, Inc., 57 A.D.3d 503, 868 N.Y.S.2d 737, 738 (2d Dep't 2008) (citing Liberman, 80 N.Y.2d at 437-39, 590 N.Y.S.2d 857, 605 N.E.2d 344). ( See also Konikoff ......
-
Boehner v. Heise
...the foul language used by theplaintiff little league coach at the conclusion of a game. See Phelan v. Huntington Tri-Village Little League Inc., 57 A.D.3d 503, 504, 868 N.Y.S.2d 737 (2d Dep't 2008). The court held that the defendant was entitled to qualified privilege because the letter was......
-
Thorsen ex rel. Sons of Norway, Inc. v. Sons Norway
...solely by [common law or constitutional] 10 malice.” Id. (emphasis added) (citing Phelan v. Huntington Tri–Village Little League, Inc., 57 A.D.3d 503, 504–505, 868 N.Y.S.2d 737 (2d Dep't 2008)). “Mere conclusory allegations, or charges based upon surmise, conjecture, and suspicion are insuf......
-
Ratajack v. Brewster Fire Dep't, Inc. of the Brewster-Southeast Joint Fire Dist.
...official concerning a member's conduct will therefore also trigger the qualified privilege. Phelan v. Huntington Tri-Vill. Little League, Inc. , 57 A.D.3d 503, 868 N.Y.S.2d 737, 738–39 (2008) (finding letter from little league umpire to director of the Department of Parks and Recreation con......