Dameron v. Hamilton
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Randolph. Circuit Court. — Hon. A. H. Waller, Judge. (1) Appellant insists that the court committed no error in this case in giving or refusing instructions on behalf of the defendant, for the reason that the instructions all taken together clearly submit the only issues in the case, namely: Was the article libelous? Was that article true? (2) The respondent complains that instruction B especially is misleading and confusing.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Randolph. Circuit Court. — Hon. A. H. Waller, Judge. (1) Appellant insists that the court committed no error in this case in giving or refusing instructions on behalf of the defendant, for the reason that the instructions all taken together clearly submit the only issues in the case, namely: Was the article libelous? Was that article true? (2) The respondent complains that instruction B especially is misleading and confusing. The only thing as to said instruction that the respondent complains of is that the words “or less than $120,000” make the instruction confusing. The…
1Opinion of the Court
RAILET, C.
Libel
Plaintiff sued defendant in the circuit court of Randolph county, Missouri, to recover damages on account of the alleged publication of a libel in defendant’s newspaper. After a trial upon the merits, the jury returned a verdict for defendant. A new trial was granted plaintiff, and defendant appealed from an order granting same.
The petition charges that on the 7th of April, 1911, defendant was the owner and publisher of the Huntsville Herald, at Huntsville, in the county aforesaid. After setting out the usual preliminaries, the petition charges:
“That said defendant on the 7th…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Bluedorn v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- Fitzgerald v. HaywardSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
- Brewer v. ChaseMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- State v. LentzSupreme Court of Missouri · 1904
- State v. HeltonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Donovan v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1943
- Heigold v. United Railways CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1925
- State Ex Rel. County of Buchanan v. FulksSupreme Court of Missouri · 1922
- Smallwood v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1924
- State v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1935
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.