Cattell v. Dispatch Publishing Co.
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from 81. Louis Court of Appeals. (1) The. court erred in withdrawing an instruction from the jurors after they had retired to deliberate on their verdict.
Read the full summary
Appeal from 81. Louis Court of Appeals. (1) The. court erred in withdrawing an instruction from the jurors after they had retired to deliberate on their verdict. Thompson on Charging the Jury, p. 131. {2) The court had no right whatever to direct the jurors as to which party they should find for, and when the •court suggested to the jury that their verdict should be, “ We, the jury, find for the defendant,” it was error, and tended to prejudice the jury against the plaintiff, and in favor of the defendant. Thompson on Charging the •Jury, sec. 54 ; Proffat on Jury Trials, sec. 457. If the…
1Opinion of the CourtNorton, J.
This is an action for libel, in which the defendant is charged with publishing certain libelous statements, particularly set forth in the petition. The-, answer admitted the publication of the statements charged, in the petition as libelous, and by way of justification, alleged the statements so published to be true. The jury to which the cause was submitted returned, into court the-following verdict, to-wit: “We, the jury, in the case of David A. Cattell v. The Dispatch Publishing Company, find no cause for action. F. W. Weber, Foreman.” The-foreman of the jury handed this verdict to the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- National Bank of the Metropolis v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
3Cited by22 opinions
- Ewart v. PenistonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911
- Keyes v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1930
- Porter v. R. J. Boyd Paving & Construction Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- State v. HarrisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- State v. MaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.