CELIA FARBER, plf-ap, v. RICHARD JEFFERYS, def-res, KEVIN KURITSKY def

9297. CELIA FARBER, plf-ap, v. RICHARD JEFFERYS, def-res, KEVIN KURITSKY def — Nesenoff & Miltenberg, LLP, New York (Philip A. Byler of counsel), for ap — Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, New York (Joseph Evall of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis B. York, J.), entered November 9, 2011, which granted defendant Richard Jefferys’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against him, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Supreme Court properly determined that plaintiff was a limited public figure because, through her publication of countless articles, she voluntarily injected herself into the controversial debate on whether HIV causes AIDS with a view toward influencing the debate (see Krauss v. Globe Intl., 251 AD2d 191, 192 [1st Dept 1998]), and “project[ed] [her] name and personality before… readers of nationally distributed magazines… to establish [her] reputation as a leading authority” in this area (Maule v. NYM Corp., 54 NY2d 880, 882-883 [1981]). The court also properly concluded that the subjects of HIV/ AIDS, plaintiff’s journalism, and her receipt of an award for her journalism fell “within the sphere of legitimate public concern” (Chapadeau v. Utica Observer-Dispatch, 38 NY2d 196, 199 [1975]). Indeed, the record established that plaintiff was a contentious figure within the traditional HIV/AIDS community.