Legal Opinion

Satterfield Ex Rel. Satterfield v. McLellan Stores Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 10, 1939PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

~WiNBORNE, J.

Does the complaint in this action state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, either for slander or for libel? The answer is “No.”

1. The allegation of slander is based upon this language used by the defendant Thomas : “When I say anything I mean it . . . you may go to the office and get your money for the day.” If it be conceded that these words are susceptible of the meaning attributed to them as alleged in the complaint, no actionable wrong was committed. “The use of mere abusive epithets by defendant, and by him spoken of, or to the plaintiff, is not actionable.”…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Prins v. Holland-North America Mortgage Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Gambrill v. SchooleyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1901
  3. Ringgold v. . LandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  4. McKeel v. . LathamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  5. Idol v. . JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1829

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Rickbeil v. Grafton Deaconess HospitalNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Stutts v. Duke Power Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  3. Tallent v. BlakeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  4. Arvey Corporation v. PetersonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1959
  5. Tinkham v. HallCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API