Dunn v. Hearst

This is an action for libel against defendant as proprietor of the Examiner, and is the outgrowth of a publication in that journal of plaintiff’s alleged presence as timekeeper at a brutal prize-fight in San Mateo County. Plaintiff was awarded a verdict of five hundred dollars damages, and this appeal is taken from the judgment and the order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial.

Two grounds are urged for reversal: 1. That the verdict is excessive and was actuated by passion and prejudice; and 2. That the court erred in giving and refusing certain instructions.

As to excessive damages: The…