Krug v. Pitass
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal from trial term. Action by Julius F. Krug against John Pitass, Stanislaus Slisz, .and Marcel Smeja for libel. From a judgment entered on a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $6,250, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendants appeal. Affirmed.
1Opinion of the CourtHardin, P. J.
It seems the article published was libelous per se. Cruikshank v. Gordon, 118 N. Y. 178, 23 N. E. 457; Secor v. Harris, 18 Barb. 425; Carroll v. White, 33 Barb. 616.
2. The defendants gave evidence tending to show that they had no malice in the publication of the article. To rebut that evidence, plaintiff called Sullivan, who testified to a conversation with Pitass in 1890, which was objected to at folio 179, and in response to the objection the court observed: “This is direct evidence on the question of malice.” To that ruling no exception was taken. After some evidence was given, a further…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bergmann v. . JonesNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Cruikshank v. . GordonNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Secor v. HarrisNew York Supreme Court · 1854
- Scott v. Sun Printing & Publishing Ass'nNew York Supreme Court · 1893
- Lee v. McLaughlinNew York Supreme Court · 1889
3Cited by1 opinion
- Krug v. PitassAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897