Hudson v. Garner
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Benton Circuit Court. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. among other points, made the, following : 1. The petition does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
Read the full summary
Error to Benton Circuit Court. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. among other points, made the, following : 1. The petition does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The complaint is that Mrs. Garner used words by which she meant that plaintiff had been guilty of adultery, and it does not, appear that the plaintiff is or ever was a married woman. • (3 Mo. 160.) 2. Admitting that the words are actionable in themselves, if spoken falsely and maliciously, whether they were intended to impute either adultery or fornication, yet as plaintiff, by inuendo, has…
1Opinion of the CourtRyland, Judge
This is an action for slander. The petition is according to the form under the new code of practice, and it charges that Polly Garner, the wife of the other defendant, Luke Garner, in the presence and hearing of Calvin Beck and divers other persons, on the first day of January, in the year 1854, at the county of Benton, spoke and published the following false and slanderous words, of and concerning the plaintiff; that is to say: “ Go along home (speaking to plaintiff’s son John) and see your whorish mother, and tell your mother to send you down to the south, to see your father Tom (intending…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Thomas v. CroswellNew York Supreme Court · 1810
- Beirer v. BushfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
3Cited by13 opinions
- Sanders v. Daniel International Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1984
- Buckley v. KnappSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- Anton v. St. Louis Suburban Newspapers, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1980
- Brown v. George Knapp & Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- Sotham v. Drovers Telegram Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1912
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.