## Facts

- Bernard “Toots” Shor, a New York restaurateur and nightclub owner, sued Sherman Billingsley, proprietor and on-air host of “The Stork Club Show.”
- During a nationally distributed radio/television broadcast, Billingsley made an ad-lib remark about Shor’s finances, stating he “wished he had as much money as [Shor] owes,” or words to that effect.
- Shor alleged the remark was false and defamatory because it imputed substantial indebtedness and harmed his business reputation.
- Billingsley moved to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, arguing the spontaneous, unscripted broadcast could not be treated as actionable defamation (and should not be treated like libel).
- The trial court (Special Term) denied the motion to dismiss; the Appellate Division later affirmed that denial.

## Issues

1. Whether an unscripted defamatory statement transmitted by radio/television can be treated as actionable defamation per se.
2. Whether the libel–slander distinction should turn on the existence of a written script or on the practical reach and expected harm of mass broadcasting.
3. Whether a plaintiff must plead special damages for an ad-lib broadcast remark alleged to injure business reputation.

## Decision

- The court denied the motion to dismiss, holding the complaint sufficiently stated a defamation claim based on the broadcast.
- The court treated radio/television broadcast defamation as actionable per se, even where the statement was ad-lib rather than read from a prepared script.
- The Appellate Division affirmed, allowing the action to proceed on the pleadings.

## Legal Principles

- Common-law defamation rules distinguish libel (traditionally written and presumed damaging) from slander (traditionally spoken and often requiring special damages absent limited per se categories).
- When defamatory words are disseminated by mass broadcast media, the historical assumptions supporting the slander requirement of special damages carry less force because the communication can reach a very large audience.
- For pleading sufficiency, an ad-lib radio/television broadcast may be treated as defamation per se based on the medium’s wide dissemination and potential reputational harm, rather than on whether the words originated in a script.

## Conclusion

The court held that an alleged defamatory ad-lib remark broadcast to a mass audience could support a defamation claim without pleading special damages, reflecting a functional application of defamation doctrine to radio and television broadcasting.


Shor v. Billingsley, 4 Misc. 2d 857, 158 N.Y.S.2d 476 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cnty. 1957)