Smulyan v. N.Y. Liquidation Bureau

Decision Date08 February 2018
Docket Number5638,Index 102021/15,5637,5636
Citation158 A.D.3d 456,71 N.Y.S.3d 412
Parties Ira SMULYAN, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. NEW YORK LIQUIDATION BUREAU, et al., Defendants–Respondents.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Ira Smulyan, appellant pro se.

Jackson Lewis P.C., White Plains (Michael A. Frankel of counsel), for New York Liquidation Bureau, respondent.

Daren J. Rylewicz, Albany (Leslie C. Perrin of counsel), for Civil Service Employees Association, respondent.

Hite & Beaumont, P.C., Albany (John H. Beaumont of counsel), for Allen C. DeMarco, respondent.

Renwick, J.P., Manzanet–Daniels, Andrias, Kapnick, Moulton, JJ.

Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo Hagler, J.), entered April 19, 2016, which granted defendants' motions to dismiss the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The defamation claim against New York Liquidation Bureau (N.Y.LB), plaintiff's former employer, and Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA), the union of which he was formerly a member, is time-barred to the extent it is based on alleged instances of defamation that occurred before November 13, 2014—more than one year before plaintiff commenced this action (see CPLR 215[3] ). To the extent it is based on an alleged instance of defamation that occurred within the limitations period, the claim is wholly speculative (see Dillon v. City of New York, 261 A.D.2d 34, 38, 704 N.Y.S.2d 1 [1st Dept. 1999] ). Plaintiff contends, based on nothing but conjecture, that the reason he did not receive a job offer from a third party that was considering him for employment is that the third party contacted NYLB for a reference, and NYLB defamed him.

The fraud claims against NYLB and Alan C. DeMarco, the chairperson of its Performance Appraisal Appeal Board, allege collusion in connection with a 2009 grievance proceeding and plaintiff's 2010 separation from employment. These claims were waived under the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Jarusauskaite v. Almod Diamonds, Ltd.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • June 26, 2020
    ...Ctr., 171 A.D.3d 502, 502-503 (1st Dep't 2019); Schwartz v. Chan, 162 A.D.3d 408, 409 (1st Dep't 2018); Smulyan v. New York Liquidation Bar, 158 A.D.3d 456, 457 (1st Dep't 2018); Sprecher v. Thibodeau, 148 A.D.3d at 655. 2. Slander In support of her claim for slander, plaintiff alleges that......
  • Offor v. Mercy Med. Ctr.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • April 9, 2019
    ...Data Bank (NPDB) report, were made outside the one-year statute of limitations (see CPLR 215[3] ; Smulyan v. New York Liquidation Bur., 158 A.D.3d 456, 457, 71 N.Y.S.3d 412 [1st Dept. 2018] ). We reject plaintiff's argument, based on a 20–year–old, unreported Tennessee case applying Tenness......
  • Flaherty v. Dixon
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • February 16, 2023
    ... ... one-year statute of limitations. See Smulyan v. N.Y ... Liquidation Bureau , 71 N.Y.S.3d 412, 413 (1st Dep't ... ...
  • Higgins v. Gladstone Gallery LLC
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • February 10, 2023
    ...allegedly defamatory words or set forth the context with sufficient clarity to indicate that the defamation occurred. For this reason, in Smulyan, (158 A.D.3d at 457), the First affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs defamation claim because the plaintiff "contend[ed], based on nothing bu......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT