Schrimper v. Heilman
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Linn District Court. Slander. — The petition charges, that defendant on, etc., in the presence and hearing of, etc., in a conversation had with, etc., of and concerning the petitioner, spoke and published of, etc., the following false, etc. Answer in denial, trial and verdict for plaintiff. Motion for new trial overruled, and defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.
Appellant complains of the action of the court below in overruling his motion for a new trial. This was based upon three grounds: First, that the verdict was against law and evidence; second, that the jury misunderstood the instructions; third, that the evidence did not support the allegations of the petition.
*5061. new trial : conflicting evidence. I. The words charged are actionable. This is not denied. That they were spoken, is clearly shown by the testimony of one of the plaintiffs. Defendant -... .„ ... and his wife testified, that the words were not spoken, nor any similar language used. The…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Brockman v. BerryhillSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Davenport v. CummingsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1863
3Cited by6 opinions
- Zeliff v. JenningsTexas Supreme Court · 1884
- Bailey v. BaileySupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
- Hinkle v. DavenportSupreme Court of Iowa · 1874
- Prime v. EastwoodSupreme Court of Iowa · 1877
- Halley v. GreggSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.