Legal Opinion · Dissent
Malouf v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
Utah Supreme Court
Decided December 18, 1929No. 4763Published
1DissentFolland, J.
I dissent. Appellant in his brief states:
“The controlling question presented on this appeal is whether or not the communication from the defendants to Heber J. Grant, set forth in haec verba in the complaint, is libelous per se.”
The law of libel is stated in Nichols v. Daily Reporter Co., 30 Utah 74, 83 P. 573, 574, 3 L. R. A. (N. S.) 339, 116 Am. St. Rep. 796, 8 Ann. Cas. 841, as follows:
“ * * * Written derogatory or disparaging words which impute to a person the commission of a crime, or degradation of character, or which have a tendency to injuriously affect him in his office or trust,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Peck v. Coos Bay Times Publishing Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1927
- Nichols v. Daily Reporter Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1905
- Donaghue v. GaffySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1885
- Ruble v. KirkwoodOregon Supreme Court · 1928
- Yakavicze v. ValentukeviciousSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1911
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.