Fitzsimmons v. Cutler
Supreme Court of Vermont
SLANDER. — The declaration, after the usual introduction, but without any colloquium, proceeds: “Yet the said Lyman, well knowing the premises, but contriving and maliciously intending to defame and injure the said James, and to cause him to be brought into publick scandal and disgrace, and to cause him to be esteemed and suspected to be a person guilty of the crime of perjury, heretofore (to wit.) on the tenth day of February, 1825, and at divers other times previous and…
Read the full summary
SLANDER. — The declaration, after the usual introduction, but without any colloquium, proceeds: “Yet the said Lyman, well knowing the premises, but contriving and maliciously intending to defame and injure the said James, and to cause him to be brought into publick scandal and disgrace, and to cause him to be esteemed and suspected to be a person guilty of the crime of perjury, heretofore (to wit.) on the tenth day of February, 1825, and at divers other times previous and since, in certain discourse which the said Lyman, at Burlington aforesaid, then and there had with divers good and worthy…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Royce, J.
The words for which this action is brought are declared on as being actionable in themselves, since no special damage is laid, as having resulted to the plaintiff’from their publication. If actionable, they are within that class of slanderous words, which tend to exclude a person from society, by charging him with a crime for which he would be liable to punishment. To determine whether these words, as laid in this declaration, are actionable or not, it is necessary, first, to see how far the declaration is affected by the inuendos professing…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ward v. ClarkNew York Supreme Court · 1806
- Smith v. I. BrushNew York Supreme Court · 1811
3Cited by2 opinions
- Smith v. HollisterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1860
- State v. AtkinsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1869