Barkly v. Copeland
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tehama County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Foote, C.
— This action was brought to recover damages for slanderous words spoken by defendant, in (as it is alleged) falsely charging the plaintiff, Barlcly, with being interested with Russell Speegle in the larceny of certain cattle, the property of one Thomas Polk, and with receiving the same, knowing them to have been stolen by Speegle. The defense set up was justification on the ground that the language spoken was true, and certain facts in mitigation were also pleaded. The jury found for the defendant, and from the judgment thereupon rendered, and an order refusing a new trial, this…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Sharon v. Sharon, 11991 (Cal. 7-17-1889)California Supreme Court · 1889
- People v. DyeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- People v. CollinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Hausman v. HauslingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
3Cited by18 opinions
- People v. BurtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
- People v. BurkeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
- People v. Ye FooCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
- People v. TalbottCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- State v. ForshaSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.