Van Vechten v. Hopkins
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action for a libel* The declaration contained two counts, one for writing, composing and pub- . . hshmg, and the other for printing and publishing the alleged libel.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action for a libel* The declaration contained two counts, one for writing, composing and pub- . . hshmg, and the other for printing and publishing the alleged libel. The first count was as follows : “ Abraham Van Vechten complains of David I. Hopkins, in custody, &c. for that whereas the said Abraham now is, and hitherto hath been, a good, faithful and honest citizen of the state of Nexv-Tork. and of a good name, 7 0 7 fame and reputation, and at the time of making, de1 ' u vising, composing, writing and publishing the false, scandalous and malicious libel, hereinafter first…
1Opinion of the CourtVan Ness, J.
The decision of the questions arising in this case, will be greatly facilitated by first defining the meaning and office of an averment, a colloquium and an innuendo. The use in pleading of an averment, is to ascertain that to the court, which is generally, or doubtfully expressed ; so that the court may not be perplexed of ■whom, or of iwhat, it ought to be understood; and to add matter to the plea to make doubtful things clear. (System of Pleading, 121.) A colloquium, serves to show that the words were spoken in reference to the matter of the averment. An innuendo is explanatory of the…
2Cited by69 opinions
- Lewis and Herrick v. . ChapmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
- Julian v. American Business Consultants, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1956
- Avirett v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1893
- Fry v. BennettThe Superior Court of New York City · 1851
- Bradley v. CramerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.