Legal Opinion
Friedell v. Blakely Printing Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided May 15, 1925No. 24,029PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilson, C. J.
Action for libel. Plaintiff was a candidate for public office. Defendant corporation published the Rochester Daily Post and Record. A. W. Blakely and Clare W. Blakely were president and secretary respectively of the corporation. One Wurtele who was engaged in other work contributed editorials for a small weekly compensation. The corporation used such portion of the contributions as it saw fit to accept and publish. Wurtele wrote an article concerning plaintiff’s candidacy. It was published. It was libelous. A demand for retraction was made without results. This suit followed. The court…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Coleman v. MacLennanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1908
- Hebner v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
- Munick v. . DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
- McKenzie v. William J. Burns International Detective Agency, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
- Barrett v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Herbert v. LandoSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Lake v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- Bahr v. Boise Cascade Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2009
- Jadwin v. Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.