Morris v. Lachman
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The court in its instruction to the jury, after stating certain evidence that had been introduced by the defendant, charged them that such evidence tended to prove, according to the weight they might give to it, that the defendant did not speak the alleged slanderous words. The further facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Foote, C.
— Action to recover damages for slander, in the alleged speaking by Lachman, of aiid concerning the plaintiff and one Henry Cavendish, the words: “They are horse.-thieves and scoundrels.”
The defendant filed a second amended answer, in which the main ground of defense was stated to be, that he believed his horse, harness, and wagon had been stolen, and did not know the persons who had taken them, and that in using the language complained of he had no reference to the plaintiff, but spoke it of those *111unknown persons who he honestly believed had committed a larceny of his property.
By…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People v. VasquezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
- People v. PerryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
3Cited by19 opinions
- Meyer v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Linforth v. S.F. Gas and Electric Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. PorterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1951
- State v. BuralliNevada Supreme Court · 1903
- Gajanich v. GregoryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.