Beams v. Beams
Decision Date | 17 June 1910 |
Citation | 138 Ky. 818,129 S.W. 298 |
Parties | BEAMS v. BEAMS. |
Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Whitley County.
"To be officially reported."
Action by Nancy E. Beams against Drew Beams. Judgment for plaintiff and defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Faulkner & Sharp, for appellant.
Tye & Siler, for appellee.
Nancy E. Beams instituted this action against her father, Drew Beams, to recover $5,000 for slander. In her original petition she charged that he spoke of her these words In an amended petition, filed soon after the original, she alleged that the words were these: In a second amended petition, filed about a year afterwards, she alleged that the words were these: Appellant filed an answer in which the allegations of the petition were traversed. The case came on for trial, and the court required the plaintiff to elect whether she would sue for the words in her original petition or in her second amended petition. She elected to sue for the words in the second amended petition. The proof on the trial showed that Drew Beams was a widower; that his daughter and her husband lived with him, keeping house for him at his request; that he went to a circus and came back drunk; that the next morning he missed from his pocket $10 which he thought he had in his pocket the night before. Plaintiff testified that, when her father missed the money the next morning, he said to her, "Bet, you stole my money;" that she said, "Pap, I ain't seed your money," and commenced crying, and told him she had not come there to rob him, but came to take care of him; that he said he knew when she was standing at the head of his bed that night. She introduced two other witnesses, whose testimony tended to support hers in some measure. On the other hand, the father testified that he missed the money, that he had no thought of charging his daughter with stealing it, but that he simply asked her if she had gotten the money, thinking she had taken it out of his pocket to take care of it for him, or to tease him.
On this evidence the court gave the jury the following instruction ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Desai v. Charter Commc'ns, LLC, Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-459-DJH
...the message would attribute to it. 786 S.W.2d at 858 (citing Deitchman v. Bowles , 166 Ky. 285, 179 S.W. 249 (1915) ; Beams v. Beams , 138 Ky. 818, 129 S.W. 298 (1910) ). The Yancey court remanded the case with the instruction that should it proceed to trial, "the jury must decide whether t......
-
Yancey v. Hamilton
...of the meanings a recipient of the message would attribute to it. Deitchman v. Bowles, 166 Ky. 285, 179 S.W. 249 (1915); Beams v. Beams, 138 Ky. 818, 129 S.W. 298 (1910). "A publication must be read and construed in the sense in which the readers to whom it is addressed would ordinarily und......
-
Head v. Commonwealth
...30 S.W. 873, 17 R. 212; Stark v. Commonwealth, 169 Ky. 539, 184 S.W. 875. We so far have assumed, as was expressly held in Beams v. Beams, 138 Ky. 818, 129 S.W. 298, that the word "steal" does not necessarily signify an asportation against the owner's consent with an intention to convert. I......
-
Head v. Com.
... ... 212; Stark v. Commonwealth, 169 Ky. 539, ... 184 S.W. 875 ... We so ... far have assumed, as was expressly held in Beams v ... Beams, 138 Ky. 818, 129 S.W. 298, that the word ... "steal" does not necessarily signify an asportation ... against the owner's consent ... ...