McKeel v. . Latham
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.
Without regard to the character of the language used on the post card in question, whether libelous or other, it would seem that the allegation of publication is not sufficient to state a cause of action. McIntosh N. C. Practice and Procedure, 362; Annotation, 24 A. L. R., 237.
Under the general rule that a libel is published when, and only when, it is communicated to some third person, who understands it, it has been held in cases dealing with post cards sent through the mails, that, in order to constitute actionable publication, the post card must have been read or communicated to some…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Freeman v. Dayton Scale Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1929
- Penry v. DozierSupreme Court of Alabama · 1909
- Hedgepeth Ex Rel. Hedgepeth v. ColemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
- Brown v. Elm City Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Morris v. . CleveSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Cody v. . HoveySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- Satterfield Ex Rel. Satterfield v. McLellan Stores Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- Taylor v. Jones Bros. Bakery, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Oliver v. . Hood, Comr. of BanksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Pressley v. Continental Can Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.