Polimeni v. Asbestos Lead & Hazardous Waste Laborers' Local 78
Opinion of the Court
The Supreme Court also properly granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to dismiss the second cause of action to recover damages for defamation of Polimeni’s character. CPLR 3016 (a) requires that the allegedly defamatory material be set forth in the complaint. Although the flyer was annexed to the complaint (see Pappalardo v Westchester Rockland Newspapers, 101 AD2d 830 [1984], affd 64 NY2d 862 [1985]), a perusal of the flyer does not reveal the allegedly defamatory material and, thus, dismissal of that cause of action is required (see Black-Kelly v Marley, 83 AD3d 981 [2011]; Hausch v Clarke, 298 AD2d 429, 430 [2002]).
Finally, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to dismiss the fourth cause of action to permanently enjoin the defendant from trespassing on the property of the plaintiff Shelvin Plaza Associates, LLC (see Merkos L’Inyonei Chinuch, Inc. v Sharf, 59 AD3d 403, 408 [2009]). Florio, J.P., Dickerson, Chambers and Cohen, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.