Taylor v. Hearst
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Belcher, C.
The defendant, W. R. Hearst, was sole proprietor of the daily newspaper published in San Francisco and known as the Examiner. On January 10, 1892, there appeared in that paper an article charging, in substance, that J. W. Taylor had a contract with the city of San Francisco to supply basalt blocks for paving streets, at the rate of $45 per 1,000, and that he and one Henry Barron, who had been appointed keeper of the corporation yard near the foot of Sixth street, and whose duties required him to keep track of material belonging to the street department, had conspired together to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wilson v. FitchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
- Childers v. San Jose Mercury Printing & Publishing Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
- Lick v. OwenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Mowry v. RaabeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
3Cited by33 opinions
- Davis v. HearstCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Kapellas v. KofmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Tingley v. Times Mirror Co.California Supreme Court · 1907
- Turner v. HearstCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Schomberg v. WalkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.