Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Harper v. . Pinkston

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1893PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1ConcurrenceAvery, J.

(Discussion of Lord Denman's Act, section 580 of The Code, bill of discovery, matters of privileges, etc.) The wife, who alone is charged to have been slandered, is not a party to the action. There being no special damage alleged as to the husband, who is the sole plaintiff, the complaint fails to state a cause of action. Newell on Defamation, 365, 1849; Odgers Slander and Libel, 313, 346; Folkard's Starkie on Slander, 332; The Code, sec. 177. The words were not used in regard to the husband, and his reputation certainly has not been assailed. He must aver special damage. The action should,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Gordon v. . SandersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880
  2. Hagins v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1890

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Fleming v. . Light Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  2. Fleming v. Carolina Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  3. Butler v. StitesCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1928

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API