A New York state appeals court on Thursday upheld the dismissal of a defamation suit targeting WPIX-TV and its reporter Magee Hickey over a 2014 story that misidentified a fifth-grade teacher accused of bullying her student.

The ruling, which reinforced New York's "single publication" rule in defamation cases, found that neither the television station nor Hickey had been "grossly irresponsible" in running the story and then failing to retract it until the lawsuit was filed a year later.

Plaintiff Starlight Rainbow, who teaches at a different school, sued for defamation after Hickey's March 2014 story named her as the allegedly abusive teacher at PS 235 in Brooklyn. Her complaint also sought to hold WPIX accountable for not correcting a "blatant and obvious error in a story posted on their website, after it was repeatedly brought to WPIX's attention."

According to court documents, the true subject of the allegations turned out to be a different woman by the name of Cynthia Rainbow, but Hickey said that she relied on the accounts of the child's mother and a community activist, who both named Starlight Rainbow responsible for bullying the young girl. Hickey's attempts to confirmation the teacher's name with the city Department of Education were unsuccessful, she said.

A lower court judge dismissed the case in 2018, saying that "notwithstanding the clear inaccuracy," it was reasonable for Hickey to expect that the information she received was correct.

However, Starlight Rainbow's appeal to the First Department sparked concern from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and a coalition of 20 media organizations, who argued in an amicus brief that her arguments sought to upend the basic tenets of New York's defamation law.

According to the filing, New York courts have never held the news media liable for failing to issue a timely correction, and imposing such a standard could cause publishers to retract stories out of fear of liability, chilling reporting on stories of public concern.

"News organizations need time and space to determine whether a request reflects a legitimate issue with a story or instead comes from someone unhappy with the truth," the amici said.

The brief also argued that Starlight Rainbow sought to improperly expand the the definition of "gross irresponsibility" to demand that a journalist's sources to be either "authoritative" or "official," not just "reasonably reliable" as currently currently requires.

On Wednesday, a four-judge panel of Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department declined to depart the "single publication" rule, which generally holds that plaintiffs have only one claim for each mass publication of an allegedly defamatory statement.

"Plaintiff's position is inconsistent with the single publication rule since she, in effect, seeks to assert causes of action arising from both the initial publication and the continued publication of the article after she demanded a retraction," the panel wrote in a four-page ruling.

Bruce Rosen, partner at MARC Law who represented WPIX in the matter, said in a statement that the station was "very pleased that the First Department not only affirmed summary judgment in this matter, but also put to bed any notion that a media entity in New York can be separately legally liable for failing to correct information it has published.

"WPIX takes its responsibility seriously to correct material errors," he said.

Rainbow's attorney, Daniel Clifton of Lewis, Clifton & Nikolaidis, did not respond Thursday to a request for comment.

The Reporters Committee and an attorney for the amici did not return calls seeking comment on the ruling.

The case was captioned Rainbow v. WPIX.

Read More: