New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 74 (2026)

Privileges in action for libel

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 74. Privileges in action for libel. A civil action cannot be
maintained against any person, firm or corporation, for the publication
of a fair and true report of any judicial proceeding, legislative
proceeding or other official proceeding, or for any heading of the
report which is a fair and true headnote of the statement published.
  This section does not apply to a libel contained in any other matter
added by any person concerned in the publication; or in the report of
anything said or done at the time and place of such a proceeding which
was not a part thereof.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 162 cases (43 in the last 5 years), 1976–2026 · leading case: Greenberg v. Spitzer, 2017 NY Slip Op 6432 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Greenberg v. Spitzer, 2017 NY Slip Op 6432 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). · cites it 12× “Spitzer subsequently moved to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (7) on the grounds that the challenged statements were substantially true, privileged under Civil Rights Law § 74 as fair and true reports of judicial proceedings, or otherwise…”

Cholowsky v. Civiletti, 69 A.D.3d 110 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009). · cites it 11× “The defendants asserted that (1) the allegedly defamatory statements were protected by an absolute privilege under Civil Rights Law § 74 for “fair and true” reports of judicial or official proceedings, (2) the plaintiff, as a public figure with respect to his permit…”

Aguirre v. Best Care Agency, Inc., 961 F. Supp. 2d 427 (E.D.N.Y 2013). · cites it 7× “2d 541, 542 (2003) (affirming dismissal of plaintiffs defamation claim based on statements made by defendant in a newspaper article before defendant served its answer, where the statements were a substantially accurate description of defendant’s position in the lawsuit); see…”

Saleh v. New York Post, 78 A.D.3d 1149 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010). · cites it 9× “The defendants argued, among other things, that the article was privileged as a “fair and true” report of a judicial proceeding pursuant to Civil Rights Law § 74, and that the challenged statements were not actionable as rhetorical hyperbole or expressions of opinion.”

Sokol v. Leader, 74 A.D.3d 1180 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010). · cites it 2× “Rather, the defendant asserted that she had two defenses: the absolute privilege for “fair and true” reports of judicial proceedings (Civil Rights Law § 74; see Holy Spirit Assn.”

Rodriguez v. Daily News, L.P., 142 A.D.3d 1062 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). · cites it 4× “WPIX moved pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (7) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it, arguing that the subject news reports were absolutely privileged under Civil Rights Law § 74. In support of its motion, WPIX submitted two emails received from the Office of…”

Kinsey v. New York Times Co., 991 F.3d 171 (2d Cir. 2021). · cites it 2× “12 New York Civil Rights Law Section 74 creates a privilege “for the publication of a fair and true report of any judicial proceeding.”

Becher v. Troy Publ'g Co., 20 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2033 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992). · cites it 6× “The gravamen of plaintiffs claim with respect to each of those articles or headlines is that defendant expressly or impliedly falsely reported that plaintiff had been indicted on felony bribery charges, whereas in fact he had only been charged with the misdemeanors of making an…”

Biro v. Condé Nast, 883 F. Supp. 2d 441 (S.D.N.Y. 2012). · cites it 2× “Applicable Law New York’s Civil Rights Law provides: A civil action cannot be maintained against any person, firm or corporation, for the publication of a fair and true report of any judicial proceeding, legislative proceeding or other official proceeding, or for any heading of…”

Martin v. Daily News L.P., 121 A.D.3d 90 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014). · cites it 4× “Defendants’ Motions Defendants moved to dismiss the first complaint, arguing that the columns were not defamatory, that they were non-actionable opinion, that they were privileged under Civil Rights Law § 74, and that Justice Martin could not adequately plead, or show, that…”

Stepanov v. Dow Jones & Co., 42 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1973 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014). · cites it 2× “” Alternatively, defendant argued that the statements were privileged under Civil Rights Law § 74 as a fair and true report of an official proceeding in Switzerland.”

Daniel Goldreyer, Ltd. v. Van De Wetering, 23 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2531 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995). · cites it 3× “However, these two statements should have been accorded the absolute privilege as to fair and true reportage of an official proceeding embodied at Civil Rights Law § 74. This provision requires only that a statement be "substantially accurate” for the privilege to attach (Holy…”

Show all 162 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.