Legal Opinion
Martin v. Sutter
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 28, 1922No. Civ. No. 2512PublishedCited by 4 opinions
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Placer County. J. E. Prewett, Judge. Affirmed. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
The plaintiffs are husband and wife. The action is for damages claimed to have been suffered by the plaintiffs for slanderous language alleged to have been used by the defendant of, to and concerning the plaintiff Mrs. Floretta Martin. The action is based on subdivision 4 of section 46 of the Civil Code, which defines slander as “a false and unprivileged publication other than libel, which imputes (to a person) ... a want of chastity.” The amended complaint alleges s
“That on the 29th day of May, 1919, while the plaintiff herein, Floretta Martin, was on her premises in the said City of Auburn,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Stein v. United R.R. of S.F.California Supreme Court · 1911
- Edwards v. San Jose Printing & Publishing SocietyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Plyer v. Pac. Portland Cement Co.California Supreme Court · 1907
- Robertson v. EdelsteinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Maynard v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Palm Springs Tennis Club v. RangelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- White v. ValentaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- Bartholomew v. Youtube, LLC., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Bond v. DeWittCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954