Case v. Marks
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action of slander, for charging the plaintiff, a feme sole, with sexual intercourse with Denison Crane and George Merriam. The defendant pleaded Not guilty, with notice that he should give in evidence the truth of the charge.
Read the full summary
This was an action of slander, for charging the plaintiff, a feme sole, with sexual intercourse with Denison Crane and George Merriam. The defendant pleaded Not guilty, with notice that he should give in evidence the truth of the charge. The cause was tried at Hartford, January term, 1850. On the trial, the plaintiff introduced evidence tending to prove the speaking of the words alleged in the declaration, and also to prove the general good character of the plaintiff for chastity. The defendant then offered a witness to prove, that the defendant, at the time of speaking the words, was, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Church, Ch. J.
No justification of the words spoken was proved, on the trial; but the defendant, in mitigation of damages, offered to prove, that at the time of the speaking of the words, he was a man of very small property, and was worth but little. In the case of Bennett v. Hyde, 6 Conn. R. 24. this court held, that the plaintiff might prove the amount of the defendant’s property, to aggravate damages, in an action of slander; and this solely on the ground of a supposed weight and influence which wealth might give to the slanderous words. We do not intend to overrule that decision, although…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Montgomery v. KnoxSupreme Court of Florida · 1887
- Ware v. CartledgeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1854
- Watson v. WatsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Republican Pub. Co. v. MosmanSupreme Court of Colorado · 1890
- Schulze v. JalonickCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1898
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.