Reese v. Haywood
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the CourtGeorge Rose Smith, J.
This is an action by the appellant for libel. At the close of the plaintiff’s case the court directed a verdict for the defendants. We have concluded that the peremptory charge was correct, for the reason that the words complained of were not actionable per se and there is no substantial proof of special damages.
In 1955 the plaintiff, a farmer, bought about $15,000 worth of farm equipment from the defendant Haywood, doing business as Clay County Implement Company. Reese later returned part of the equipment and contended that there was then a balance of $64 due to him from the seller. This…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Studdard v. TrucksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1877
- Wells v. AdamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1960
- Honea v. KingSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922
- Rachels v. DeenerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1930
3Cited by15 opinions
- United Insurance Co. of America v. MurphySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
- A. D. Luster, A's Fishhouses, Inc. v. Retail Credit CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1978
- Little Rock Newspapers, Inc. v. DodrillSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1983
- Harlan v. CurboSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1971
- Minor v. FaillaSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1997
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.