Anonymous
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
The words charged are not actionable per se. To make them such it is not enough that the charge thereby imputed was one involving turpitude in a moral sense, but it must constitute an indictable offence, upon conviction of which punishment may be inflicted. (Young v. Miller, 3 Hill, 21; Crawford v.Wilson, 4 Barb., 504.) The charge in the present case, if true, would not subject the plaintiff to an indictment for any criminal offence. In this I exclude any idea that an indecent public exposure of the person was included in the charge made by the defendant. There was no evidence tending to show…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Crawford v. WilsonNew York Supreme Court · 1848
3Cited by16 opinions
- Hemmens v. . NelsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Pegram v. StortzWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1888
- Privitera v. Town of PhelpsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
- Amick v. MontrossSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
- Wagner v. WagnerNew York Supreme Court · 1966
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.