Bloom v. Bloom
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. THIS was a writ of error to |he District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia, in an action of slander brought by Catharine Bloom, the plaintiff below, against John Bloom and Elizabeth his wife. The declaration con- ■ tamed five counts, and a verdict was found for the plaintiff on the first and second counts.
Read the full summary
In Error. THIS was a writ of error to |he District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia, in an action of slander brought by Catharine Bloom, the plaintiff below, against John Bloom and Elizabeth his wife. The declaration con- ■ tamed five counts, and a verdict was found for the plaintiff on the first and second counts. The second count which was the only one now objected to, charged, that Elizabeth had said of the plaintiff, “ Catharine Bloom, (the meaning,) stole one hundred dollars; she (the said Catharine Bloom, the plaintiff, meaning,) stole a ten dollar note, (a note of an…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Duncan J.
The error complained of is, that some of the words in the second count are not actionable ; and for this reason the judgment is vicious, although there are other words in the count which are actionable. Words to be actionable, must import an imputation of some crime liable to punishment; some capital offence or other infamous crime or misdemeanour; and this without the aid of epithets affixed in the declaration. There was a time, and it is a reproach to the law that such time ever was, that Courts employed all their faculties in conjecturing a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Van Vechten v. HopkinsNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- Respublica v. De LongchampsSupreme Court of the United States · 1784
3Cited by1 opinion
- Eaton v. WhiteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1847