Genet v. Mitchell
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action for a iThel. The declaration cons tamed three counts. The second count was abandoned at the trial. The first count charged the defendant with publishing, On the ~6th March, 1807, in a newspaper called " Repu6lkan Grisis~," at Tray, in the county of Rensselaer, a " false, scandakrns, and malicious libel, of and concerning the plaintiff," which (omitting the innuendoes and averment~) wa~ as follows " Genet is on the alert in Ren~elaer.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action for a iThel. The declaration cons tamed three counts. The second count was abandoned at the trial. The first count charged the defendant with publishing, On the ~6th March, 1807, in a newspaper called " Repu6lkan Grisis~," at Tray, in the county of Rensselaer, a " false, scandakrns, and malicious libel, of and concerning the plaintiff," which (omitting the innuendoes and averment~) wa~ as follows " Genet is on the alert in Ren~elaer. He is deters-. mined to put down his enemies, and make them bite the dust. He intends his committee of vigilance shall cover themselves with…
1Opinion of the CourtYates, J.
A new trial was moved for, on the following grounds:
1. That the first libel set forth in the declaration is not supported by proof.
2. That the libel stated in the other count was justified.
S. That the jury were misdirected by the judge.
This cause was tried under the qualified abandonment, as stated; to which, objections have been raised in the argument. I consider the doctrine laid down in 1 Sound. 207. n. 2. as the law on the subject, and that the exception is incorrectly taken. The course adopted by the plaintiff was proper ; and it was compe*128tent to him to abandon part of the libellous…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Moss v. PettingillSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1859
- People v. StarkNew York Supreme Court · 1891