Cushing ex rel. Cushing v. Hederman
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Crawford District Court. — Hon. S. M. Elwood, Judge. Action to recover damages for speaking words with reference to plaintiff indicating that she was guilty of acts of unchastity. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $1,200. Defendant appeals. —
1Opinion of the Court
McClain, J. —
1 Appellant contends that there is no evidence that plaintiff was unmarried at the time of the acts imputed to her, and that, therefore, the language used did not constitute slander per se; but the distinction which is urged as between words imputing unchastity to a married woman and like words with reference to a single woman is not founded on any authority which' has been brought to our attention. It is true that the doctrine recognized in this state that words imputing unchastity to a woman are actionable per se is contrary to authorities in many of the states. See, however,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Lovejoy v. MurraySupreme Court of the United States · 1866
- Livingston v. BishopNew York Supreme Court · 1806
- Turner v. HitchcockSupreme Court of Iowa · 1866
- Bailey v. BaileySupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
- Beardsley v. BridgmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Bolton v. ZieglerDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1953
- United States v. Toledo Newspaper Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1915
- Verhoeks v. GillivanMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
- Home Savings Bank v. OtterbachSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
- Charleson v. RussellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1909
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.