Stanley v. Webb
New York Supreme Court
mHI'S was an action for a libel. Plea, the general issue. On JL the trial, the defendant by his counsel admitted the publication, and also that the defendant was, at the time of such publication, and still is, the proprietor of the Hew York Courier and Enquirer. The plaintiff’s counsel then read in evidence the libel, as follows: " City Intelligence. Extorting money to hush up a complaint.
Read the full summary
mHI'S was an action for a libel. Plea, the general issue. On JL the trial, the defendant by his counsel admitted the publication, and also that the defendant was, at the time of such publication, and still is, the proprietor of the Hew York Courier and Enquirer. The plaintiff’s counsel then read in evidence the libel, as follows: " City Intelligence. Extorting money to hush up a complaint. Some days ago, a negro named James W. Phelps, was arrested on a complaint preferred by one George W. Stanley, that he had posted up handbills purporting that the steamer Manhattan would leave for Albany,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Cowles J.
There was only one exception taken at the trial. The disposal of that disposes of the case. The action is for a libel; the plea the general issue, alone; There is no justification of the publication set up, and the only question is whether the defendant was properly allowed to prove that Phelps had entered the complaint against the plaintiff and Lowndes, and made the affidavit offered.
The evidence was admitted by the court in mitigation of damages alone; for the bill of exceptions states expressly that it was not admitted as proof of the truth of the complaint which…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Snyder v. AndrewsNew York Supreme Court · 1849
3Cited by2 opinions
- Lauder v. JonesNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1904
- Rogers v. BeardNew York Supreme Court · 1860