Gray v. Pentland
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. ERROR to the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny . * J COUnty* This was an action brought by Pentland, the plaintiff below, against Gray, for defamatory language contained in an affidavit made by Gray, and sent to the Governor of the Com-“touching the official conduct of the plaintiff, who was the prothonotary of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny countyand also for verbal slander in promulgating its contents, ^ aPPeare<^ evidence, that a rough draft of this…
Read the full summary
In Error. ERROR to the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny . * J COUnty* This was an action brought by Pentland, the plaintiff below, against Gray, for defamatory language contained in an affidavit made by Gray, and sent to the Governor of the Com-“touching the official conduct of the plaintiff, who was the prothonotary of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny countyand also for verbal slander in promulgating its contents, ^ aPPeare<^ evidence, that a rough draft of this affidavit had been drawn up by Gray, and handed by him to George Cochran, with a request that he would transcribe it, and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court, (Tilghman C. J. being sick, and absent,) was delivered by
Gibson J.
It is undoubted, that the occasion of the affidavit, which constituted .one ground of the action, so far excused the úse of the defamatory words, that malice would not be implied from the use of those words alone; and hence it was necessary, that actual malice should be proved. The question is, will any thing short of direct and positive proof . of express malice be sufficient ? As to that, I cannot doubt. In an action for a malicious prosecution, which is in many respects analogous to the present, and…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Root v. King & VerplanckNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- Vanderzee v. M'GregorNew York Supreme Court · 1834
- Mickle v. LucasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1823