Lynde v. Johnson
New York Supreme Court
Motion by the plaintiff for a new trial, on exceptions taken at Erie Circuit and ordered heard at General Term, in the first instance. The action was for slander, for words alleged to have been spoken by the defendant of the plaintiff imputing to the latter a want of knowledge or skill in his profession.
Read the full summary
Motion by the plaintiff for a new trial, on exceptions taken at Erie Circuit and ordered heard at General Term, in the first instance. The action was for slander, for words alleged to have been spoken by the defendant of the plaintiff imputing to the latter a want of knowledge or skill in his profession. The plaintiff was a physician and surgeon, and was called upon as such to treat a young man whose right arm had been seriously injured while engaged in the act of coupling cars upon a railroad, and after consultation with two other members of the medical profession proceeded to and did…
1Opinion of the Court
Bradley, J.:
No special damages were shown. The right of the plaintiff to recover depended upon the conclusion that the words complained of were actionable per se. The proposition is well settled that words falsely spoken of a physician, imputing to him general professional ignorance or want of skill or integrity in, and having relation to, his profession, are slanderous and will support an action. And the same rule applies to those engaged in other professions, trades, business or employment. (Folkard’s Starkie on Sl. and Lib., 110; Southee v. Denny, 1 Exch., 196; Foot v. Brown, 8 Johns., 64;…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Sanderson v. . CaldwellNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Fowles v. . BowenNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
- Olmsted v. MillerNew York Supreme Court · 1828
- Foot v. BrownNew York Supreme Court · 1811
- Sumner v. UtleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1828
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.