Garr v. Selden
New York Supreme Court
Demurrer to declaration. The action was for a libel. The declaration alledged that the plaintiff was an attorney and counsellor at law and a solicitor in chancery; that having been concerned in the prosecution of divers suits, &c. for the defendant Selden and one Richards, upon their retainer, he commenced in action in this court against them for the recovery of, moneys claimed by the plaintiff to be due from them to him, for his work, labor and services as such attorney,…
Read the full summary
Demurrer to declaration. The action was for a libel. The declaration alledged that the plaintiff was an attorney and counsellor at law and a solicitor in chancery; that having been concerned in the prosecution of divers suits, &c. for the defendant Selden and one Richards, upon their retainer, he commenced in action in this court against them for the recovery of, moneys claimed by the plaintiff to be due from them to him, for his work, labor and services as such attorney, counsellor, and solicitor, in and about the prosecution of those suits, &c.; that the defendant and said Richards pleaded…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Edmonds, J.
To impute to a professional man ignorance or want of skill in a particular transaction, is not actionable. To be actionable, words of that character must be spoken or written of him generally. It is not so, however, of words which impute want of integrity. They are actionable, whether used generally of his profession or particularly as to some one transaction. The words in this case impute want of integrity, and are actionable, per se.
It is averred that they were pertinent to the matter in hand, and therefore privileged. But in the mean time the count avers that they…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Battersby v. CollierAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
- Gauvreau v. Superior Publishing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1885
- Battersby v. CollierAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
- Gunning v. AppletonNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1880