Sayre v. Jewett
New York Supreme Court
Motion in arrest. The action was slander ; the declaration contained three counts, and the plaintiff had a general verdict for $100. In the first count the words were charged to have been spoken to the plaintiff, as thus, “you are a thief,” &c. of which there was no proof.
Read the full summary
Motion in arrest. The action was slander ; the declaration contained three counts, and the plaintiff had a general verdict for $100. In the first count the words were charged to have been spoken to the plaintiff, as thus, “you are a thief,” &c. of which there was no proof. In the second count it was alleged that in a certain other discourse which the defendant had in the presence and hearing of divers citizens, the defendant falsely and maliciously spoke and published of and concerning the plaintiff, these other false and defamatory words, “he is a thief,” &c. In the third count, it was…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Nelson, J.
The third count is bad, and the better opinion appears to be, that the defect in it is not cured by the verdict, and that the defendant in a case like this, is entitled to have the judgment arrested. Cro. Jac. 126. 2 Str. 934. 1 Saund. 242, n. 3. 2 Chitty’s Pl. 263, n. 7 Johns. R. 359. But there can be no objection on the judge’s certificate to amend the verdict so as to apply it to the second count, which is unexceptionable. According to the certificate, the evidence applied as well to the second as to the third count, and in such cases it is the settled practice of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- President of the Union Turnpike Road v. JenkinsNew York Supreme Court · 1803
3Cited by11 opinions
- Laber v. CooperSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Burhans v. TibbitsNew York Supreme Court · 1851
- People ex rel. McInnes v. Columbia Paper Bag Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
- Baker v. RandNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Case v. BuckleyNew York Supreme Court · 1836
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.