Legal Opinion

Wright v. Paige

New York Court of Appeals

Decided June 15, 1867PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBockes, J.

Appeal from a judgment. The action is for slander. The words charged, among other opprobrious epithets, were that the plaintiff kept a whore-house. Mo special damage is alleged, nor does it appear that any was proved or attempted to be proved. The plaintiff proved the uttering of the words by the defendant and had a verdict in his favor.. It is urged that the words are not actionable jper se. In Martin, v. Stillwell (13 Johns. 275), the words weré, “ Mrs. Martin kept a bawdy-house.” Held actionable. This case is referred to and approved in Young v. Miller (3 Hill, 21), where Judge Beoesoe…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Zabriskie v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1855
  2. Van Vechten v. HopkinsNew York Supreme Court · 1809
  3. Root v. StuyvesantNew York Supreme Court · 1837
  4. Haggart v. . MorganNew York Court of Appeals · 1851
  5. Gibson v. WilliamsNew York Supreme Court · 1830

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Pollard v. LyonSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  2. Sleight v. WoodsNew York Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Gribble v. Pioneer-Press Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
  4. Derrick v. WallaceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914
  5. Julian v. Kansas City Star Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1908

1 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