Commander v. Pedersen
| Decision Date | 10 August 1934 |
| Citation | 116 Fla. 148,156 So. 337 |
| Parties | COMMANDER v. PEDERSEN. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Lake County; J. C. B. Koonce, Judge.
Suit by C. C. Commander against W. L. Pedersen. Judgment in favor of defendant, and plaintiff brings error.
Reversed and remanded, with directions.
COUNSEL Wm. Hunter and Billie B. Bush, both of Tampa for plaintiff in error.
Allen E. Walker, of Winter Haven, and Gaines & Futch, of Leesburg for defendant in error.
The writ of error in this case is to a judgment entered in favor of the defendant on demurrer being sustained to amended declaration.
The amended declaration was in five counts. Neither count of the declaration alleges any special damages. The first count of the declaration, after alleging that the plaintiff was a man of good reputation, etc., and that he was the general manager of the Florida Citrus Exchange and alleging that the Florida Citrus Exchange is a co-operative organization under the laws of the state of Florida organized for the purpose of marketing and selling citrus fruit for the growers thereof who are members of the association and sub-exchanges affiliated with and marketing their fruits through the said Citrus Exchange, and that the position of general manager was an office of trust and responsibility, further alleges that there was at the time of the alleged grievance, and for many years prior thereto, in existence a by-law of the Florida Citrus Exchange, of which the plaintiff was general manager (section 7 of article 7 of said by-laws), which reads as follows: It is then alleged that the defendant well knew of the existence of this by-law. It alleges that the defendant, well knowing all the matters and things alleged, by then and there contriving and maliciously intending to injure the plaintiff in said office or position as general manager of the Florida Citrus Exchange and to bring him as such general manager of the Florida Citrus Exchange into public scandal and disgrace, on the 13th day of May, 1932, in Lake county, Fla., in a certain discourse by the defendant then and there had concerning the plaintiff and in the presence and hearing of divers persons, falsely and maliciously spoke of and concerning the plaintiff in his office or capacity of such general manager certain false, scandalous, and defamatory words, as follows: 'That last year, Mr. Commander (meaning the plaintiff) and the Manager of the Dundee Association (meaning the Dundee Citrus Growers Association, which was then affiliated with and marketed the fruit of its members through the Florida Citrus Exchange) purchased fruit and shipped it through the said Dundee Association, and when they would get high prices, that would be their fruit, and when they would get low prices, it would be the growers' fruit.' The declaration then charges: 'which words were falsely and maliciously untrue and uttered for the purpose of bringing the plaintiff as such General Manager of the Florida Citrus Exchange into disrepute, and injuring him in his said office or position, and thereby accusing the plaintiff of using his office and influence as such General Manager to his own financial gain and to the financial loss of citrus growers who marketed their fruit through said Dundee Association and the Florida Citrus Exchange, and further thereby accusing the plaintiff of violating the said By-Laws of the said Florida Citrus Exchange, which violation, if true, would have been cause for his removal as such General Manager.'
The second count, in addition to the allegations made in the first count, charges that the defendant spoke and published of and concerning the plaintiff in his said office or capacity as general manager, as follows: 'That this last season (meaning the fruit shipping season of 1931-1932) Mr. Commander (meaning the plaintiff) and his brother-in-law, Mr. Bailey (the Manager of the Haines City Citrus Growers Association, which is affiliated with and markets the fruit of its members through the Florida Citrus Exchange) purchased fruit and sold it through other sources than the Florida Citrus Exchange, and that he (meaning the plaintiff) did not have confidence enough in his organization to sell the fruit that he had purchased through it.' And alleges: 'and thereby falsely accusing plaintiff of not having confidence in the said Florida Citrus Exchange, of which he is such General Manager, and further accusing the plaintiff of violating the said By-Laws of the Florida Citrus Exchange mentioned in the first count hereof, which violation, if true, would have been cause for his removal as such General Manager.'
The third count in like manner charges that the defendant spoke and published of and concerning the plaintiff as follows: 'That he, (the said Pedersen) had his life's savings in the citrus business, and he wasn't going to permit a bunch of crooks in the Tampa office to take it away from him.' And alleges: 'That said words were used in the course of and at the same time of the speaking of the words alleged in the first and second counts hereof, and were spoken in connection therewith, and that the said defendant did then and there refer, and it was so by the hearers of said words understood to refer, to this plaintiff as one of the said crooks in the Tampa office, the defendant then and there meaning that the plaintiff was a crook, and was dishonest in his office or capacity as General Manager of the Florida Citrus Exchange, and that said words were used in a defamatory sense of and concerning the plaintiff in his said office as such General Manager.'
The fourth count in like manner charges that the defendant spoke of and concerning the plaintiff as follows: 'That Mr. Commander (meaning the plaintiff) was a stockholder in Shaver Brothers Canning Company, and that he used the Exchange Fruit for the benefit of said cannery.' And alleges: 'thereby meaning that the plaintiff was in violation of his duty as General Manager of the Florida Citrus Exchange, using or handling the fruit of the grower members of the Florida Citrus Exchange for the profit or advantage of the said Shaver Brothers Canning Company, of which defendant alleged plaintiff was a stockholder, and to the financial benefit of the said Shaver Brothers Canning Company, of which he was alleged to be such stockholder, at the expense and to the injury of citrus growers who were marketing their fruits through Associations affiliated with or marketing through the Florida Citrus Exchange.'
The fifth count alleges in like manner that the defendant spoke of and concerning the plaintiff as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Belli v. Orlando Daily Newspapers, Inc.
...549 (Fla. 1956); Walsh v. Miami Herald Publ. Co., 80 So.2d 669 (Fla.1955); Richard v. Gray, 62 So.2d 597 (Fla.1953); Commander v. Pedersen, 116 Fla. 148, 156 So. 337 (1934); O'Neal v. Tribune Co., 176 So.2d 535 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1965); Hevey v. News-Journal Corp., 148 So.2d 543 (Fla. Dist.Ct......
-
Carlson v. Wplg/Tv-10, Post-Newsweek Stations
...Joopanenko v. Gavagan, 67 So.2d 434 (Fla.1953); Campbell v. Jacksonville Kennel Club, 66 So.2d 495 (Fla.1953); Commander v. Pedersen, 116 Fla. 148, 156 So. 337 (Fla.1934). Because this injury is a necessary and proximate cause of the words spoken, general damages are presumed or implied fro......
-
LAWNWOOD Med. Ctr. INC. v. SADOW
...without excuse." [e.s., c.o.] 146 So. at 238-39. In Hartley & Parker v. Copeland, 51 So.2d 789 (Fla.1951), and Commander v. Pedersen, 116 Fla. 148, 156 So. 337 (1934), the court held that general damages are conclusively presumed to result from defamation per se and that "special damages ne......
-
Diplomat Electric, Inc. v. Westinghouse Electric Supply Co.
...the offended party is not obligated to prove either malice or special damages in order to sustain his cause of action. Commander v. Pedersen, 116 Fla. 148, 156 So. 337; Tip Top Grocery Co. v. Wellner, 135 Fla. 518, 186 So. 219. In the early development of the law of slander spoken words wer......