The Appellate Division modified the Order insofar as it denied defendants' motion to dismiss the defamation claim, and granted the motion. The claim must be dismissed as against all defendants, because the only statements found actionable by the motion court were made to plaintiff's paralegal, that is., plaintiff's representative, and not to a third party. The defamation per se claim is included, since no harm can be presumed to result to plaintiff from statements made to its own representative. Contrary to plaintiff's contention, the court did not "infer" that defamatory statements were made to its clients. It ruled that statements made to plaintiff's clients were nonactionable because they were pleaded without the requisite particularity and/or time-barred, pursuant to CPLR 3016[a].
Ginarte Gallardo Gonzalez & Winograd v. Schwitzer, NY Slip Op 02492 (1st Dep't April 27, 2021)
