Legal Opinion

Moberly v. Preston

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided January 15, 1844PublishedCited by 6 opinions

ERROR to Livingston Circuit Court. 1. The declaration is defective. There is no cause of action sufficiently set out. The inuendo attached to each count does not help it, there being no sufficient colloquium, or previous statement. — 4 Mo. Rep., Dyer vs. Morris, 214. 2. The Circuit Court clearly erred in sustaining the objections to the questions propounded to the witnesses, Bridgman and Hendricks.

Read the full summary

ERROR to Livingston Circuit Court. 1. The declaration is defective. There is no cause of action sufficiently set out. The inuendo attached to each count does not help it, there being no sufficient colloquium, or previous statement. — 4 Mo. Rep., Dyer vs. Morris, 214. 2. The Circuit Court clearly erred in sustaining the objections to the questions propounded to the witnesses, Bridgman and Hendricks. It is competent for a defendant in slander, upon a plea of not guilty, to prove in mitigation of damages that the slanderous words were first spoken by others. In this case there was not only issue…

1Opinion of the Court

Tompkins J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Francis Preston, and Zera, his wife, brought their action, for words spoken, against William Moberly, in the Circuit Court of Livingston county, and there obtained a judgment, to reverse which he prosecutes this writ of error.

There are three counts in the declaration. In the first count it is charged, that the defendant, in a conversation held about Zera Preston, while she was sole and unmarried, spoke, of and concerning her, these words: “Mrs. Preston had a child in Kentuckymeaning that she was guilty of fornication.

In the second count, after a…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Church v. BridgmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1839

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Buckley v. KnappSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
  2. Davis v. SladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Hess v. GanszCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1901
  4. Baldwin v. BoulwareMissouri Court of Appeals · 1899
  5. Roe v. ChitwoodSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1880

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API