Atteberry v. Powell
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Dallas Circuit Court. This was an action. for the speaking of slanderous words. The petition contains two counts.
Read the full summary
Error to Dallas Circuit Court. This was an action. for the speaking of slanderous words. The petition contains two counts. In the first count it was charged that the defendant on, &c., at, &c., “ in a certain conversation with one Absalom Austin, and in the presence and hearing of divers other-good citizens of, &c., in a certain conversation with said Absalom Austin of and concerning the said plaintiff George W. Atteberry, and of and concerning the character of said plaintiff for honesty and integrity, and of and concerning an affidavit and oath which plaintiff before that time had made and…
1Opinion of the CourtSoott, Judge
The object of the present practice act was to introduce truth and simplicity in pleadings. The act requires that the pleadings should be verified by affidavit. This requirement must necessarily exclude inconsistent answers. As an answer in justification of a charge for slander must admit the speaking of the slanderous words, the defendant can not deny and justify the speaking of words at the same time. To be satisfied of this, it would seem only to be necessary to place *433the two answers in juxtaposition. Under the old system the speaking of the slanderous words might be denied in one plea and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Berry v. DrydenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1842
- Ayres v. CovillNew York Supreme Court · 1854
3Cited by21 opinions
- Cottrill v. KrumSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
- Minter v. Bradstreet Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1903
- State ex inf. Hadley v. Delmar Jockey ClubSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Darrett v. DonnellySupreme Court of Missouri · 1866
- Lewis v. McDanielSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.