Walton v. Singleton
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. ERROR to the District Court for the city and county c ni. -i > i, r • ■ oi Philadelphia. . ' . This was an action of slander brought by Jesse Walton against William Singleton. The declaration contained twelve counts. The jury gave' a. general verdict for 5,600 dollars damages, of which the plaintiff afterwards entered a remittitur for 2,600 dollars.
Read the full summary
In Error. ERROR to the District Court for the city and county c ni. -i > i, r • ■ oi Philadelphia. . ' . This was an action of slander brought by Jesse Walton against William Singleton. The declaration contained twelve counts. The jury gave' a. general verdict for 5,600 dollars damages, of which the plaintiff afterwards entered a remittitur for 2,600 dollars. The defendant moved in arrest of judgment and assigned the following reasons. • 1. The declaration contains a count for uttering the following words which are not actionable, “ you got to bed with Sarah M-Gargle.” . ' ; 2. -The…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Duncan J.
The action was slander, set out in twelve *451counts, verdict for the plaintiff on all the counts, and judgrnent arrested. ■ '
•The counts objected to are those, in which it is,stated,
1. That the plaintiff got to bed with Sarah M'-Gargle., 2. He is such a whoring fellow, that it is with difficulty he can keep a girl about the house, being continually a riding them. ■ ‘
■ 3, That he had committed fornication, meaning thereby, to charge him with being guilty of the crime of fornication, and it appearing in the declaration that he Was a married man,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Giddens v. MirkSupreme Court of Georgia · 1848
- Demarest v. HaringNew York Supreme Court · 1826
- Beirer v. BushfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832