Cooper v. Bruce
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to Beaver county. Slander, by Jacob Bruce against John Cooper. In the plaintiff’s declaration the words set out were, “Jacob Bruce” (the plaintiff meaning) “ was guilty of buggary with a mare.” The proof of the words spoken by the defendant of the plaintiff was, that “ he had acted with a mare”—“ he had been guilty with a mare”—and that “ he could prove that Bruce was guilty of acting with a mare.”
Read the full summary
ERROR to Beaver county. Slander, by Jacob Bruce against John Cooper. In the plaintiff’s declaration the words set out were, “Jacob Bruce” (the plaintiff meaning) “ was guilty of buggary with a mare.” The proof of the words spoken by the defendant of the plaintiff was, that “ he had acted with a mare”—“ he had been guilty with a mare”—and that “ he could prove that Bruce was guilty of acting with a mare.” The defendant’s counsel asked the court to charge the jury, that this proof did not support the plaintiff’s declaration ; but the court was of different opinion, and the plaintiff got a…
1Per curiam
There has been no want of inclination on our part to sustain the action in its present shape; and it seemed at first to be sustained on the rule laid down in the conclusion of the opinion delivered in Gundt v. Gundt. But the substance of the words proved is too generally laid; and not so much the substance as the effect of it. It would have been easy to set out the very words, or at least the particular substance of them, as proved by any one of the witnesses; and to have shown by a colloquium and proper averments, that they *110imputed the offence which the plaintiff has thought proper to…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Itri v. LewisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Herst v. BorbidgeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
- Long v. Fleming, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1837