Schnobrich v. Venske
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Carver county to recover $5,000 for slander. The case was tried before Tifft, J., who when plaintiff rested denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the action upon the grounds that the complaint did not state facts, and the evidence did not establish facts, sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and at the close of the testimony denied motions by both parties for directed verdicts, and a jury which returned a verdict for defendant.
Read the full summary
Action in the district court for Carver county to recover $5,000 for slander. The case was tried before Tifft, J., who when plaintiff rested denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the action upon the grounds that the complaint did not state facts, and the evidence did not establish facts, sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and at the close of the testimony denied motions by both parties for directed verdicts, and a jury which returned a verdict for defendant. From an order denying his motion for a new trial, plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.
Action for slander. There was a verdict for tbe defendant. The plaintiff appeals from the order denying his motion for a new trial.
The plaintiff made a motion, which was denied, to return a verdict in his favor upon the ground that the words used by the defendant were ■actionable or slanderous per se, and the only question is whether they were. They were spoken in German. The witnesses differ as to the German words used and as to their meaning in English. Since the defendant had a verdict we must, for the purpose of this appeal, accept a meaning favorable to him. He claims that the English…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Beek v. NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
3Cited by2 opinions
- Fitzgerald v. PietteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
- Lloyd v. HarrisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923