Call v. Larabee
| Decision Date | 11 December 1882 |
| Parties | CALL v. LARABEE AND OTHERS. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Harrison district court.
Action for libel. A demurrer to the petition was sustained. Plaintiff appeals.S. H. Cochran, for appellant.
No appearance for appellees.
1. The plaintiff sets out in his petition the cause of action in the following language: “That he is a resident of Harrison county, Iowa, and has been for four years last past, and a man of good moral character; that prior to March 29, 1881, he stood well as a moral man and law-abiding citizen among his neighbors and friends; that on or about said date the defendants, willfully designing to injure plaintiff's good character as a man, maliciously published in the Logan Courier, a weekly newspaper printed and circulated in Harrison county, an article, a copy of which is in the following words, to-wit:
“ ‘ To whom it may concern: This is to certify that the members of the Seventh-day Adventist church, living in the vicinity of Logan, Iowa, did withdraw the hand of fellowship from Daniel Call at a church meeting held in Logan, Iowa, on the fifth day of January, 1879, believing him to be utterly unworthy of their confidence as a Christian. We desire our fellow-men to understand that we consider him a man of immoral character, and not worthy of a place in any church of Jesus Christ. His presence at our meetings is not desired by us, until we have clear evidence of a decided change in his character.
T. D. LARABEE, Elder.
W. S. BECK, Deacon.
N. A. BECK, Clerk.'
--That said article so published by the defendants under their joint signature was wholly false, and that defendants had no authority to publish the same; that plaintiff was not a member of the church which defendants claim to represent at any time; that if any resolution was ever passed by the members, as intimated in said false and malicious publication, the same was passed without authority, and that the said publication was willfully, maliciously, and without authority published by defendants, to cause it to be suspected and believed that the plaintiff had been guilty of the crime of seduction; that said publication was also intended to cause the plaintiff to be suspected of being a dishonest man; that said libelous publication was wholly false, and known to be so by defendants; that in addition to the fact that the same was published to cause plaintiff to be suspected of crime, as aforesaid, the same was intended to provoke plaintiff to wrath, or expose him to public contempt, hatred, and ridicule, and to deprive him of the benefit of public confidence and social intercourse; that said libel...
To continue reading
Request your trial