Stanley v. Brit
Tennessee Supreme Court
In Error. An imperfect statement of a good canse of action will be aided by verdict. In slander for words not actionable in themselves, a colloquium is necessary to point them to the object to which they relate; but it is not indispensable that the colloquium should precede the statement of the words. [222] Stanley brought his action, fpr slanderous words, in the County Court of Perry, against Brit.
Read the full summary
In Error. An imperfect statement of a good canse of action will be aided by verdict. In slander for words not actionable in themselves, a colloquium is necessary to point them to the object to which they relate; but it is not indispensable that the colloquium should precede the statement of the words. [222] Stanley brought his action, fpr slanderous words, in the County Court of Perry, against Brit. After the usual inducement of good character, &c. the declaration sets out, “ that the plaintiff, Stanley, had been sworn as a witness, in a cause in the said County Court of Perry County, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Pece, J. absent Judge CRAbb.
delivered'the opinion of the Court; The principal objection relied on by the defendant in error is, that there is no sufficient colloquium laid in the declaration. Where the words charged, are not in themselves actionable, and where it is necessary to point them to some specific object, to which they ought to relate, then a colloquium is necessary to apply the words, in order to give effect to their meaning and intended application; but it is not indispensable in such a case that the colloquium should precede the statement of the words spoken, although it is *553certain…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Niven v. MunnNew York Supreme Court · 1816
- Fowle v. RobbinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815