The Justinian Volume 1976 Article 1 Issue 8 December

The Justinian Volume 1976 Article 1 Issue 8 December 1976 The uJ stinian Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/justinian Recommended Citation (1976) "The usJ tinian," The Justinian: Vol. 1976 : Iss. 8 , Article 1. Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/justinian/vol1976/iss8/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Special Collections at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in The usJ tinian by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. et al.: The Justinian Congratulations to the new BLS football champs, The Frogs. They defeated the 3)ulitiuiau Fobbingtons 5 -4 on D ecember 11. ~222 TUESDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1976 NO.5 Civil Court decision Herrmann v. Cr·ea FDculty KO's EqUDI Ed. Note: In our issues of De The question before the court, cember L 1975. and February therefore, is whether as a mat 11, 1976. the Justinian published ter of law the words spoken of Stutlent Committee Vote lengthy articles detailing the the defendant in this action By RICHARD GRAYSON mittee and reported that the because I see this as part of a legal relationships between Wil were defamatory when spoken A student-faculty committee SBA Executive Board was ready continuing trend. Student input liam Shakespeare Herrmann, a of an attorney or professor of to study the legal research, writ to nominate students in accord was cut back from the Decanal former profe':';sor at BLS, and law. ing and moot court programs at ance with Article 6, Section 3, of Search Committee, and now the law school. Hermann was a BLS will not receive the coop the SBA Constitution. That ec this. I think that concessions tenured professor when he was eration of the SBA because of tion provides, "The SBA may toward student equality were fired on September 17. 1975. As unequal representation between not participate in any faculty/ a result of that firing. several the two groups. student committee of which the suits were filed by Herrmann The faculty created the com number of faculty positions and against the school and individ· mittee of foul' faculty members the number of student positions ual faculty members. On Octo and three students in response is not equal . ." The memo was ber 8, 1976, a Kings County to student complaints last year, not discussed at the December Civil Court decision was hand particularly against the moot 3 meeting, but Prof. Brian Com ed down by Judge Salvatore T. court program. These com erford, faculty secretary, said DeMatteo in Prof. Joseph Crea's plaints were sent by the Stu that it would be placed on the counterclaim against Herrmann, dent-Faculty Curriculum Com agenda for the next faculty which arose from the slander mittee to the entire faculty. meeting. case of Herrmann v. Crea. The ProfessoJ's Richard Allan, S tacy SBA President Howard Peltz Justinian reprints the entire de· Caplow, Bailey Kuklin and Da noted that the SBA Executive cision to bring the BLS com vid Rice were then named to Board was "excited" about the munity up to date on one as the committee to investigate the establishment of this committee, pect of the litigation and to legal research programs. Accord but that the seeming reluctance focus attention on the court's ing to Allan, the committee will of the faculty to equalize the description of the phrase "Court look into the moot court pro number of positions between Street Lawyer." This phrase gram first and then into the le students and faculty had put a usually has a pejorative conno gal research/ method program damper on the student input. tation, but the Court',:,; opinion (Photo by Marcia Kn ioin) of the first year students. " [The faculty decision] is a step might uplift the U/Se of the Prof. Joseph Crea, defendant In response to this inequality backward which we can't un term. Next semester. the Jus of representation (all other stu derstand," says Peltz. "We look tinian will print an updated Although, as Seelman says, dent-faculty committees h ave for students and faculty to work (Photo by Marcia Knigin) Prof. Richard Allan. a member summary of the Herrmann-BLS "the determination of when been set up with an equal num together to make improvements of the s)1pposed student-faculty litigation. words are spoken of one in re ber of members from both and not to form vot.i.!:l~ blocks. commiitee. CIVIL COURT OF THE gard to his business is often groups), the SBA Executive A 4 to 3 situation looks like CITY OF NEW YORK difficult," (2 Seelman, Law of Board sent a memo to the fac the faculty wants to outvote the made when students were mili COUNTY OF KINGS Libel and Slander, 925) this ulty. The memo, which was on students." tant, and students aren't so SPECIAL TERM, PART I court believes that the state the agenda for the December 3 Evening Vice-President J ayne militant today, and therefore the WILLIAM S. HERRMANN, J r., ments which form the subject of' faculty meeting, commended the Robinson had stronger words faculty is taking advantage." Plaintiff. this counterclaim do not come faculty for setting up the com- for the faculty. "I am concerned (Continued on Page 4) JOSEPH CREA, within the ambit of the per se Defendant. exceptions. JUDGE SAL V ATORE T. That the appellation "fool" is DeMATTEO not slanderous per se seems to SBA 'Non-Meeting' and 5/F Comm. OCTOBER 8, 1976 be clear. Even the word "faker" (Shankroff v. LaGuardia, 247 This is an action in slander App. Div. 785, appeal to the Face Curriculum Comm. Problem brought by a p rofessor of law Court of Appeals denied, 272 By MIGGIE WARMS might be discussed on a "volun fered by J ayne Robinson, Eve against hi colleague. The de N.Y. 679) or the words "bum in tary" basis after adjournment ning Vice President, and P eltz. fendant counterclaims also for At the non-meeting of the a gin mill" spoken of an at (can a non-meeting be adjourn 1. The SBA Executive Board slander on the basis of the al SBA delegate assembly on No torney, were once held to be ed?) and, after the completion had n t maintained communica legations that the plaintiff, al vember 29 (there was no quor non- landerous (Weidberg v . La of the committee reports, an tion with faculty members of though not mentioning defend um), those delegates present Guardia, 170 Misc. 374.) Al nounced that "the meeting for the CUlTiculum Committee dur ant by name, referred to him heard several committee reports, though one naturally frowns at all intents and purposes" was ing the development of the stu before a student body, as "one a speaker on NORML's (Nation the use of vituperative and adjourned. dent chairperson controversy. of the fools whose offices are on al Organization for Reform of abusive language, restrictions on 2. The faculty members "heard the eighth and ninth floors" and Marijuana Laws) budget request common and commonplace name stories" from "the other side" a "Court Street Lawyer." No of $425 and a discussion of the .calling would so restrict free current status of the recently (student members of committee) special damages are alleged. speech that many of us would Plaintiff now moves for sum bereft Student/Faculty Curricu but were never exposed to the be required to walk with our mary judgment dismissing the lum Committee. Executive Board's position or mouths tethered. In any event, counterclaim on the ground The Constitutional Revision the reasons for Executive Board defendant argues that the term that it fails to state a cause of and Procedure Committee has and Delegate Assembly action " Court St.reet Lawyer" was in done some preliminary work and on the appointment o'f Diane action. Defendant cross-moves tended to be and was in fact for similar relief. is working against a March Fernandez to the Committee and understood to be derogatory and Because both parties are deadline for presentation of a then to the student Chair. pejorative of the defendant in proposed revised SBA Constitu 3. The faculty members felt that learned in the law it would be h is profession. condescending and may seem tion to the delegate assembly. the curriculum had gone through somewhat presumptuous for the The court is aware of the The Cultural Affairs Commit nough changes for the time be court to dwell at length on the connotations of the term "Court tee is expanding its sphere to ing, and that it was time "to elementaries of the law of torts. S treet Lawyer" and, more im include sports and the Entertain sit back and take a breather." Nevertheless, because of the na portantly, of the general repu ment Committee recently "pull The Executive Board feels that ture of the complaint, it seems tation of what is termed "Court ed off" a highly successful stu the student members on the proper and indeed necessary at Street Lawyer." The court is dent/faculty tea. "committee revolted ... for per this time to outline the basic therefore in agreement with the The Library Committee is sonality reasons" and that com elements of a cause of action for defendant that the term, as a'l hoping to have the smoking mittee chairs are "not power slander. legedly applied by the plaintiff. room kept open during some positions' but liaisons whose The general rule is that slan refers to other than mere 'geo hours when the library is nor major function is to report to der "is not actionable unless ac graphical location.

Load more