Frank v. Dunning
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Dodge County. Action for slander. The substance of the complaint is stated in the opinion. Answer, a general denial, except of the fact that the defendants were husband and wife.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Dodge County. Action for slander. The substance of the complaint is stated in the opinion. Answer, a general denial, except of the fact that the defendants were husband and wife. On the trial, it was proved that the plaintiff’s hop-house was insured at the time it was burned, and that the plaintiff had received the insurance money; also that the defendant Adella Dunning had spoken the words in the hearing of several persons, some of whom knew at the time that the building was insured, while other did not; but there was no proof that the defendant knew of. the…
1Opinion of the CourtCole, J.
We have very grave doubts whether the complaint in this case is not fatally defective on account of the absence of a, colloquium showing that the words spoken imputed to the plaintiff a felonious burning. It is alleged, in substance, that the plaintiff was the owner of a certain hop-house and of a quantity of hops stored therein ; that the hop-house and hops were insured, by and for the benefit of the plaintiff, against loss or damage by fire ; that the hop-house and hops, while thus insured, were accidentally destroyed by fire ; that all these facts were known to the defendant Adella Dunning…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Goodrich v. WoolcottNew York Supreme Court · 1824
- Beswick v. ChappelCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1848
- Case v. BuckleyNew York Supreme Court · 1836
- Weil v. AltenhofenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1870
3Cited by4 opinions
- Campbell v. CampbellWisconsin Supreme Court · 1882
- Quinn v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
- Cole v. NeustadterOregon Supreme Court · 1892
- Keller v. DeanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900