McCuskey v. Kuhlmann
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the -district court for Hennepin county to recover $5,000 for slander. The answer alleged that prior to the date alleged a certain Bloom had taken from defendant without lawful right an automobile radiator which was found in plaintiff’s possession and upon demand therefor was turned over to -defendant; that whatever was said to plaintiff by defendant was uttered at the time the radiator was so found in plaintiff’s possession and at a time when defendant was…
Read the full summary
Action in the -district court for Hennepin county to recover $5,000 for slander. The answer alleged that prior to the date alleged a certain Bloom had taken from defendant without lawful right an automobile radiator which was found in plaintiff’s possession and upon demand therefor was turned over to -defendant; that whatever was said to plaintiff by defendant was uttered at the time the radiator was so found in plaintiff’s possession and at a time when defendant was laboring under great mental excitement. The case was tried before Hale, X, and a jury which returned a verdict for $1,-008.50.…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Curiam.
Plaintiff had a verdict and defendant appeals from the order denying a new trial.
The cause of action is slander, defendant being charged with having stated in the hearing of third parties that plaintiff was a thief, and it could be *461proven. On conflicting evidence the jury found for plaintiff. This court has no right to say that defendant’s witnesses were more deserving of credence than plaintiffs.
The motion for a new trial was also based on the ground of excessive damages given under the influence of passion or prejudice. The damages appear large, but not so large that the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Klein v. PaschSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
- Wojtkowski v. PetersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951