DEFAMATION ACTION REGARDING FRAUDULENT ACCOUNTING CLAIM WITHSTANDS MOTION TO DISMISS
Action by Greenberg against Spitzer for defamation based on public statements by Spitzer about Greenberg’s stewardship of AIG regarding, among other things, Spitzer’s assertion that Greenberg engaged in fraudulent accounting. Spitzer’s motion to dismiss as to those statements was denied. The court found no documentary evidence sufficient under New York procedural rules to conclude on motion to dismiss that Spitzer’s statements were substantially true as a matter of law. Greenberg v. Spitzer, 44 Misc. 3d 1202 (N.Y.S.C., June 24, 2014).
This post written by Kelly A. Cruz-Brown.
See our disclaimer.
