Ostrom v. Calkins
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of slander. The plaintiff was the owner of a distillery, and carried on the business of distilling extensively, purchasing large quantities of coarse grain.
Read the full summary
This was an action of slander. The plaintiff was the owner of a distillery, and carried on the business of distilling extensively, purchasing large quantities of coarse grain. In the fall of 1828, the defendant and his nephews having entered into a contract with the plaintiff for the sale and delivery of about 3000 bushels of coarse grain, and a misunderstanding arising whether the grain should be paid for, as delivered in parcels, from time to time, or whether the whole should be delivered before payment, the defendant refused to perform the contract, and made the circumstance the subject of…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Savage, Ch. J.
Two points arise in this case; 1. Whether the words spoken are actionable7 2. Whether the damages are excessive 7 The general rule is, that words are actionable which directly tend to the prejudice of any one in his office, profession, trade, or business, in any lawful employment by which he may gain his livelihood. To say of any one to whom credit is important in the prosecution of his business, that he is insolvent, must be actionable on the same principle that it is actionable to say so of a merchant. To say therefore of a distiller, the course of whose business…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Gary v. CrouchSupreme Court of Alabama · 2003
- Gaither v. Advertiser Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Lane v. DotyNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Clifford v. CochraneAppellate Court of Illinois · 1882
- Ware v. ClowneySupreme Court of Alabama · 1854
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.