Thomson Reuters News & Insight
Featured Content from WESTLAW
Beginning in June, Thomson Reuters News & Insight content will be available exclusively on WestlawNext®, as part of its Practitioner Insights offering. On June 21, the Thomson Reuters News & Insight website, iPhone® app and newsletters will be discontinued. See Frequently Asked Questions to learn more.

New York Legal

  •  
  •  

Courthouse. File photo.

NY Court of Appeals won't hear case holding gay label not slander

1/8/2013 COMMENTS (0)

By Daniel Wiessner 

ALBANY, N.Y., Jan 8 (Reuters) - New York state's top court on Tuesday refused to hear an appeal of a ruling that held it was not slander per se to falsely call someone gay.

Without explanation, the court denied an appeal from Mark Yonaty, who claimed in a 2009 defamation lawsuit that a former friend spread a false rumor that he was gay and ruined his relationship with his girlfriend.

The Appellate Division, Third Department, in May dismissed the case, holding that falsely labeling a person as a homosexual did not constitute slander per se, which is a form of defamation.

Justice Thomas Mercure wrote that a statement is defamatory when it exposes a person "to public hatred, shame ... contempt, ridicule ... degradation or disgrace." Because homosexuality no longer carries that stigma in New York, he said, calling someone gay cannot constitute defamation per se.

Courts in New York recognize four forms of defamation per se, including false statements that allege serious crimes, injure a person's business or career, claim someone has a loathsome disease or impute unchastity to a woman.

The Third Department decision overturned appellate decisions from the 1980s that held that falsely calling someone a homosexual was a fifth form of slander per se.

Mercure wrote for the Third Department that shifting attitudes toward gays and lesbians, including the 2011 legalization of gay marriage in New York, rendered those earlier decisions outdated.

"It cannot be said that current public opinion supports a rule that would equate statements imputing homosexuality with accusations of serious criminal conduct or insinuations that an individual has a loathsome disease," the judge wrote.

The ruling placed New York in a small minority of states, including Florida, Illinois and North Carolina, whose courts have changed the per se defamation standard to reflect evolving public opinion on LGBT issues.

Yonaty in 2009 sued Jean Mincolla, a former friend whom he claimed had told mutual friends that Yonaty was gay or bisexual. Mincolla in turn named her friend, Ruthanne Koffman, who had allegedly repeated the claim to the mother of Yonaty's girlfriend, as a third-party defendant in the case. Yonaty, who says he is straight, claimed he and his girlfriend ultimately broke up over the rumor.

State Supreme Court Justice Phillip Rumsey of Broome County in 2011 denied the defendants' motion to dismiss the claims, citing previous Appellate Division rulings that held that falsely calling someone gay was defamatory per se.

The Third Department in May reversed.

Mincolla's attorney, Alan Pope, said that because the Court of Appeals declined to hear the case, New York's three other appellate courts will be bound by the Third Department decision.

Yonaty's attorney, Philip Artz, did not return a call seeking comment.

The case is Mark Yonaty v. Jean Mincolla, New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, No. 512996.

For Yonaty: Philip Artz of McDonough & Artz.

For Mincolla: Alan Pope of Pope & Schrader.

For Koffman: Michael Livingston of Sassani & Schenck.

Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook 


Register or log in to comment.

© 2013 Thomson Reuters