Bradstreet Co. v. Oswald
| Decision Date | 08 July 1895 |
| Citation | 23 S.E. 423,96 Ga. 396 |
| Parties | BRADSTREET CO. v. OSWALD. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. The circulation of false and unfounded communications concerning the business standing of another, from which, as a natural result, the latter suffers a special damage, gives a right of action for damages actually sustained, even though such communications may have been innocently and negligently, but not maliciously, made.
2. Where, in an action for words written and alleged to be "false and unfounded," there is no allegation of malice in the printing or publication, the plaintiff is entitled to recover only his actual damages, and must, by his declaration, allege the various elements of actual damage with such certainty as fully and distinctly to advise the defendant of the sources and extent of the injury; and although a declaration in such a case may set out generally a substantial cause of action, inaccurate and uncertain averments as to the elements and measure of damage will not prevail as against a special demurrer directed to such averments.
3. Where it is alleged that, because of the words so written the plaintiff's credit was impaired to such an extent as to require the expenditure by him of a certain sum pleaded in gross, and which is alleged to have been expended in the payment of expenses while travelling, for the purpose of removing from the minds of the persons with whom he dealt the effect of the false impression thereby created, upon special demurrer to the averment of such expenditures in gross the court should require the plaintiff to set forth a fairly accurate, though not unnecessarily minute, itemized statement of the sums so expended, and upon what account, with an additional averment that such sums were necessarily expended.
4. If in consequence of the words thus spoken, it be alleged that creditors of the plaintiff, who were advancing to him goods upon credit, were induced to demand immediate payment of their claims, upon which he would otherwise have been extended time, and that the plaintiff was, in consequence, compelled to pay a discount upon his notes in order to raise cash with which to meet such indebtedness, such sums so paid out as discount are recoverable as a part of the actual damages; but, if pleaded in gross, the defendant, upon special demurrer, is entitled to have a statement, of the character indicated in the preceding headnote, touching such items.
5. Profits alleged to have been lost by reason of the plaintiff's inability to buy goods, to be in turn sold to his customers, are too remote and conjectural to be recovered.
Error from city court of Richmond; William F. Eve, Judge.
Action by James L. Oswald against the Bradstreet Company for libel. There was a judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Reversed.
J. S. & W. I. Davidson, for plaintiff in error.
E. F. Verdery and W. H. Fleming, for defendant in error.
The official report sufficiently states the facts.
1. We think the declaration contains such a substantial cause of action as would prevail against a general demurrer. It alleged that the defendant caused to be circulated concerning the plaintiff and the business in which he was engaged, a certain rumor, which was wholly false and unfounded, and which, if believed, was calculated seriously to embarrass him in his business. It is a rule of law of universal application that wherever one person...
To continue reading
Request your trial