Bartow v. Smith
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtStewart, J.
Obviously the theory upon which the trial court dismissed the plaintiff’s amended petition is that spoken words are not slander per se, unless they impute a crime, subject a person to disgrace, ridicule, odium ’ or contempt in the estimation of friends or acquaintances or the public, impute to a person an infectious disease likely to exclude him from society, impute the unfitness of one to perform the duties of an office or employment, or tend to prejudice him in his profession or trade; and that an action for slander per quod does not lie unless special damages are pleaded.^
The Court of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- LaSalle Extension University v. FogartyNebraska Supreme Court · 1934
- Bouillon v. Laclede Gas Light Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- Johnson v. SampsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Kirby v. Jules Chain Stores Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Continental Casualty Co. v. GarrettMississippi Supreme Court · 1935
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Agis v. Howard Johnson Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1976
- Jackson v. Alert Fire & Safety Equipment, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
- Lyons v. Zale Jewelry Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1963
- Potter v. City of TroyOhio Court of Appeals · 1992
- Lynn v. Allied Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1987
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.