Legal Opinion

Hess v. Sparks

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided January 10, 1891PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Motion for Rehearing. The facts are sufficiently stated in Hess v. Sparks, supra.

1Per curiam

It is urged that the opinion handed down in this case wholly ignores the question whether the language spoken by defendant below was a privileged communication, or a qualified privileged communication. It is said that defendant below was one of the board of directors, and one of the largest stockholders of the company, and that the communication was made to the then secretary and treasurer of the company, in relation to an employé of the company.

The answer in this case was a general denial only. No facts in justification, or privilege, or qualified privilege, were alleged as new matter;…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Summers v. Midland Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
  2. Cadle v. McIntoshIndiana Court of Appeals · 1912
  3. Wilcox v. Wyandotte World-Wide, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1972
  4. Klover v. RughSupreme Court of Kansas · 1917
  5. Winans v. ChapmanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1919

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API