21-66-cv Brimelow v. N.Y. Times Co. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 21st day of October, two thousand twenty-one. PRESENT: JOHN M. WALKER, JR., JOSEPH F. BIANCO, STEVEN J. MENASHI, Circuit Judges. _____________________________________ Peter Brimelow, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. 21-66-cv The New York Times Company, Defendant-Appellee. ∗ _____________________________________ FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT: FREDERICK C. KELLY, Goshen, NY. FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEE: DANA R. GREEN (David E. McCraw, on the brief), The New York Times Company, New York, NY. ∗ The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to amend the caption as above. Appeal from an order and judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Failla, J.). UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the December 16, 2020 order and January 6, 2021 judgment of the district court are AFFIRMED. Plaintiff-Appellant Peter Brimelow appeals from a December 16, 2020 order and January 6, 2021 judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Failla, J.), granting Defendant-Appellee The New York Times Company’s (the “Times”) motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (the “Complaint”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). In the Complaint, Brimelow brought state law claims alleging that the Times had defamed him in five published articles between January 2019 and May 2020 by characterizing him directly and indirectly (by referencing the content on the website that he operates, VDARE) as being “animated by race hatred,” including accusations that he is an “open white nationalist” and “anti-Semitic.” Joint App’x at 20–21, 30–31, 36, 39–40, 42–44 (Compl. ¶¶ 50, 110, 135, 153, 166, 171). The district court dismissed these claims on the ground that the Complaint had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because, among other reasons, it did not plausibly allege the necessary elements of a defamation claim under New York law with respect to any of the five articles. Brimelow timely appealed. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and issues on appeal, which we reference only as necessary to explain our decision to affirm. 2 * * * Brimelow argues on appeal that the district court erred in concluding that the Complaint failed to state a claim under New York …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals