Dixon v. Allen
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The action was brought to recover damages for a libel. The facts are stated in the head-notes and opinion of the. court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcKinstry, J.
Appellant insists that the complaint is subject to demurrer, because it does not allege in express terms that the publication was not “privileged.” The definition of libel in the Civil Code, section 45, does not affect the mode of pleading in actions of this character. The complaint herein alleges that the publication was false and “ malicious.”
*529Prior to the codes, although the courts held that malice, meaning bad intent, was a necessary ingredient of libel, they also held that it was not absolutely necessary to allege malice in a declaration, and the very common, if not universal,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bourland v. HildrethCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Hicks v. ColemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Sill v. ReeseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Rhodes v. NagleeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Brown v. KentfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
3Cited by20 opinions
- St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. ThompsonTexas Supreme Court · 1908
- Block v. Sacramento Clinical Labs, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1982
- Childers v. San Jose Mercury Printing & Publishing Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
- A. H. Belo & Co. v. LooneyTexas Supreme Court · 1922
- Carter v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.