Ebersoll v. Krug
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
slander ofhusban^ a,lcl , cannot be ]Oined ¡,, the sanie sc- „ „r See 8'went-roorth2&2. ■N ERROR. THE declaration in this case set forth, that “ whereas the said Philip Kruse and Maru his wife are both true honest r ° J . and upright citizens of the commonwealth oi Pennsylvania., an d as such from their nativity hitherto have demeaned themselves &c., and the said Mary for herself had deservedly obtained a good name &c., and had never been charged or suspected of the crimes…
Read the full summary
slander ofhusban^ a,lcl , cannot be ]Oined ¡,, the sanie sc- „ „r See 8'went-roorth2&2. ■N ERROR. THE declaration in this case set forth, that “ whereas the said Philip Kruse and Maru his wife are both true honest r ° J . and upright citizens of the commonwealth oi Pennsylvania., an d as such from their nativity hitherto have demeaned themselves &c., and the said Mary for herself had deservedly obtained a good name &c., and had never been charged or suspected of the crimes of adultery or fornication &c., and that neither the said Philip nor Mary his wife have been charged with or committed…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilgijman C. J.
and the whole court agreed that the judgment must be reversed, because the slander of the husband and slander of the wife were here joined in one action, and damages sought for the slander of both at the same time.
Judgment reversed.
2Cited by3 opinions
- Laughlin v. EatonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1866
- Gazynski v. ColburnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1853
- Humbertson v. Albright, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Fayette County1940