Farrar v. Tribune Publishing Co.
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.
— The question for decision is whether we should overrule Ott v. Press Pub. Co., 40 Wash. 308, 82 Pac. 403 (1905). It was there held that, in an action for damages on account of a newspaper publication which was libelous per se, the defendant may, under the express provisions of RCW 4.36.130, plead and prove all of the mitigating circumstances, and that the court cannot hold, in the face of this statute, that such pleading should be stricken or the evidence rejected on the theory that only punitive damages can be mitigated. The court adheres to that decision.
Appellant, publisher of the Tacoma…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited47 opinions
- Burt v. Advertiser Newspaper Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- Brown v. SwinefordWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
- Fleckenstein v. FriedmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1934
- Spokane Truck & Dray Co. v. HoeferWashington Supreme Court · 1891
- Madison v. BoltonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1958
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Herbert v. LandoSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Zuver v. Airtouch Communications, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2004
- Brink v. GriffithWashington Supreme Court · 1964
- Mitchell v. WatsonWashington Supreme Court · 1961
- Jolly v. FossumWashington Supreme Court · 1964
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.