- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
BRAVERMAN v. HALPERN
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.
Mar 9, 1999
The motion was properly denied on the ground that the allegedly defamatory statements are nonactionable, since they are contained in reports concerning plaintiff's psychological and emotional problems that were prepared by defendant as an expert witness in a judicial proceeding involving child custody and visitation in which plaintiff's mental condition was pertinent ( Finkelstein v. Bodek, 131 A.D.2d 337). We would add that plaintiff's attorney also failed to establish a sufficient excuse for the default.
Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.
x
Alert
Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature.