Evarts v. Smith
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Oakland Circuit. This was an action of slander brought _ by John L. Smith v. Caleb Evarts. The slanderous words, as laid (Avith variations) in the declaration, were: “He (the plaintiff meaning ), swore to a lie.” The proof was that in a conversation with one Jones, referring to the testimony of the plaintiff, that the defendant “charged said plaintiff with having-sworn to a lie, if he, the said plaintiff, swore as said Jones alleged that he did swear.”
Read the full summary
Error to Oakland Circuit. This was an action of slander brought _ by John L. Smith v. Caleb Evarts. The slanderous words, as laid (Avith variations) in the declaration, were: “He (the plaintiff meaning ), swore to a lie.” The proof was that in a conversation with one Jones, referring to the testimony of the plaintiff, that the defendant “charged said plaintiff with having-sworn to a lie, if he, the said plaintiff, swore as said Jones alleged that he did swear.” The plaintiff had a verdict and judgment, and the defendant brought error.
1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.
This was an action on the case for slander brought by Smith against Evarts in which the former recovered a verdict.
The slanderous accusation was set forth in the declaration as a positive charge of perjury made by Evarts; but upon the trial it appears that evidence was given on the part of Smith conducing to show that the imputed slander was uttered by Bvarts, in a conversation with one Bobbins J ones, and consisted of the statement, that if Smith had testified the day before in a case between Evarts and one Valentine, as Jones then represented, he had sworn to a lie. The plaintiff in error…
2Cited by1 opinion
- McGuire v. VaughanMichigan Supreme Court · 1895