Puneet Varma (Editor)

Lunney v. Prodigy Services Co.

Updated on
Edit
Like
Comment
Share on FacebookTweet on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Reddit
Court
  
New York Court of Appeals

Chief judge
  
Judith Kaye

Decided
  
2 December 1999

Full case name
  
Alexander G. Lunney v. Prodigy Services Company, et al.

Citation(s)
  
723 N.E.2d 539; 94 N.Y.2d 242; 701 N.Y.S.2d 684

Prior action(s)
  
Defendant's motion for summary judgment denied, Sup. Ct. Westchester Cty., July 2, 1997; renewed motion for summary judgment denied, Sup. Ct., Jan. 14, 1998; rev'd, 250 A.D.2d 230 (1999)

Subsequent action(s)
  
Cert. denied, 529 U.S. 1098 (2000)

Associate Judges
  
Joseph W. Bellacosa, George Bundy Smith, Howard A. Levine, Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick, Richard C. Wesley, Albert M. Rosenblatt

Majority
  
Rosenblatt, joined by Kaye, Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley

People also search for
  
Stratton Oakmont, Inc. v. Prodigy Services Co.

Lunney v. Prodigy Services Co., 94 N.Y.2d 242 (1999) is a leading U.S. law case on liability of internet service providers for defamation. The court held that Prodigy, an internet chatroom provider, was not considered a publisher of defamatory material posted from an imposter account due to its passive role in monitoring the chatrooms.

References

Lunney v. Prodigy Services Co. Wikipedia