Beezley v. Hansen, 8287
| Decision Date | 01 August 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. 8287,8287 |
| Citation | 4 Utah 2d 64,286 P.2d 1057 |
| Parties | d 64 William L. BEEZLEY, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Elias HANSEN, Defendant and Respondent. |
| Court | Utah Supreme Court |
W. R. Hutchinson, Salt Lake City, for appellant.
J. Grant Iverson, Salt Lake City, for respondent.
This appeal is from a summary judgment in favor of Elias Hansen, defendant below and respondent herein, in an action for slander by William L. Beezley, plaintiff below and appellant herein. Therefore we must view the facts as claimed by plaintiff and are not concerned with whether the claimed defamation was actually uttered nor whether it was true or false. Affirmed.
From the record which consists of pleadings and affidavits, it appears that Ella H. Beezley, who is the daughter of respondent, had commenced an action for divorce against appellant herein. Both respondent and appellant are attorneys-at-law. Ella Beezley had consulted with her father about the divorce and he had advised her to get another attorney of record since he might have to be a witness. She did obtain an attorney of record in the divorce proceedings but continued to seek legal advice from respondent and in an affidavit on these proceedings stated that at all times relevant to this case there existed the relationship of attorney and client between respondent and herself and that while such relationship existed she consulted with respondent about a counterclaim filed by appellant in her divorce action in which appellant sought to have awarded to him 1/2 of her interest in a certain apartment house which she owned in common with respondent, partly on the ground that she held such interest in trust for appellant because he had made payments on another property in which title had been placed in the names of both appellant and his wife. She sought the advice of respondent whether appellant could prevail in his counterclaim and she also requested him to find any cancelled checks which respondent had given to her and which she in turn had given to her husband to apply on payments of the property, title to which had been taken in both their names. During the course of this consultation and with no one else present other than respondent and Ella Beezley he told her that her husband was not fair and honest with her if he denied that she made those payments. The statement that appellant wasn't honest if he denied that his wife made the payments on the property was repeated by respondent upon questioning concerning that statement in a deposition of the divorce proceedings where respondent herein had been made a third party defendant and wherein he was produced as a witness at the request of William L. Beezley.
Since it appears from the pleadings and affidavits that the relationship of attorney and client existed at the time the allegedly slanderous words were published in the presence of only the attorney and his client and pertained to the suit, such publication was absolutely privileged and the court did not err in granting the summary judgment. See Restatement of the Law of Torts, Vol. 3, Sec. 586, pages 229-30 wherein it is stated:
'An attorney at law is absolutely privileged to publish false and defamatory matter of another in communications preliminary to a proposed judicial proceeding, or in the institution of, or during the course and as a part of a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pratt v. Nelson
...v. Armour, 949 P.2d 1251, 1256 (Utah 1997)). 46. Id. ¶ 14. 47. Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). 48. See Beezley v. Hansen, 4 Utah 2d 64, 286 P.2d 1057, 1058 (1955) ("The publication of defamatory matter by an attorney is protected not only when made in the institution of the proceedi......
-
Moss v. Parr Waddoups Brown Gee & Loveless, 20100595.
...of securing to attorneys as officers of the court the utmost freedom in their efforts to secure justice for their clients.” 4 Utah 2d 64, 286 P.2d 1057, 1058 (1955) (internal quotation marks omitted). ¶ 15 The court of appeals affirmed the district court's dismissal on alternate grounds. Mo......
-
Adams v. Peck
...1053, 1055-56, 557 P.2d 672, 673 (1976) (sheriff's letter to parole officer conducting presentence investigation); Beezley v. Hansen, 4 Utah 2d 64, 286 P.2d 1057, 1058 (1955) (attorney's unfiled deposition). See also Restatement (Second) of Torts § 588, Comment a The question whether a defa......
-
Allen v. Ortez
...P.2d 1168 (1982); McNeal v. Allen, 95 Wash.2d 265, 621 P.2d 1285 (1980). This court first considered the privilege in Beezley v. Hansen, 4 Utah 2d 64, 286 P.2d 1057 (1955). In Beezley, the husband in a divorce proceeding sued his wife's father on two counts of defamation. Both the husband a......