Cook v. East Shore Newspapers, Inc.

• Citation: 64 N.E.2d 751,327 Ill.App. 559
• Decision Date: 04 February 1946
• Docket Number: Gen. No. 44010.
• Parties: COOK v. EAST SHORE NEWSPAPERS, Inc., et al.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

327 Ill.App. 559

64 N.E.2d 751

COOK

v.EAST SHORE NEWSPAPERS, Inc., et al.

Gen. No. 44010.

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District.

Oct. 26, 1945.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 4, 1946.

Appeal from Circuit Court, St. Clair County; D. H. Mudge, Judge.

Action for libel by Ralph Cook against East Shore Newspapers, Inc., Edward Lindsay, and P. H. Wire. From a judgment for plaintiff for $20,000, the defendants appeal.

Judgment affirmed.Charles C. LeForgee, of Decatur, and Henry Driemeyer, of East St. Louis, for appellants.

James A. Farmer, of Belleville, and Louis Beasley and J. R. McMurdo, both of East St. Louis, for appellee.

BARTLEY, Justice.

Plaintiff-appellee Ralph Cook, Judge of the City Court of East St. Louis, brought suit against the East Shore Newspapers, Inc., a corporation, Edward Lindsay, R. A. Barracks, and P. H. Wire, for libel because of alleged libelous statements published by the East St. Louis Journal in the City of East St. Louis on the 27th day of August, 1934. The action was instituted on the 13th day of November, 1934, and was originally tried before a jury which resulted in the return of a verdict of guilty by the jury on January 28, 1938, and wherein the jury assessed plaintiff's damages at $37,500. Afterwards, the court allowed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict as to the defendant R. A. Barracks, and also allowed a motion in arrest of judgment as to the three remaining defendants. Afterwards, R. A. Barracks was dismissed by the plaintiff as party defendant. Various amendments were made to the pleadings, and commencing on May 12, 1942, the case was again tried with the aid of a jury. On May 19, 1942, the jury, being unable to agree upon a verdict, was discharged by the court from further consideration and a mistrial was ordered. On November 1, 1943, by agreement of the parties, the cause was tried before the court without a jury. The evidence was concluded on November 2, 1943, and on April 11, 1944, the court entered its order finding the defendants, the appellants here, East Shore Newspapers, Inc., a corporation, Edward Lindsay, and P. H. Wire, guilty and assessed the plaintiff's damages at $20,000, and entered judgment accordingly and for costs of suit. East Shore Newspapers, Inc., was the publisher of the East St. Louis Journal, Edward Lindsay was its editor, and P. H. Wire was its general manager.

The alleged libelous language consists of the headlines of the publication of the East St. Louis Journal of August 27, 1934, for the article carrying the story relating to and containing the statements which are charged to be libelous, the lead paragraphs of the story, and portions of another article relating thereto. The headlines which, it is alleged were libelous, are:

“Shakedown' Charges Against Judge Cook Made by Widow

‘Employe Says Payment Made to Keep Job.’

These headlines are followed with two sub-headlines which are not the basis of any alleged libel, but which are:

‘Mrs. Charlotte Kelley, Court Reporter, Tells Attorney General Her Position Was Bought and Paid For; That Resignation was Demanded When Payments Ceased

‘Investigation is Opened’.

The lead paragraphs which are alleged to have constituted libel, and including one paragraph about which there is no charge of libel, are as follows:

‘A Judge selling jobs--

‘A court of justice demanding and receiving part of the salary of its own employes as the price of employment--

‘A widow compelled to accept the terms of a commercial-minded judge on the bench, in order to hold her place--

‘This is the situation revealed by The Journal's investigation of East St. Louis city courts.

‘The charges are supported by affidavit. Attorney General Otto Kerner of Illinois, informed in Springfield about the facts uncovered by The Journal, today promised investigation with all the resources of the state government.

‘The judge referred to is Ralph Cook, of the East St. Louis city court. The employe who has been willing to swear that Judge Cook demanded a part of her salary, as the price of employment, is Mrs. Charlotte R. Kelly.’

The fifth paragraph of the lead is the one about which no charge of libel is made and is:

‘The charges are supported by affidavit. Attorney General Otto Kerner of Illinois, informed in Springfield about the facts uncovered by The Journal, today promised investigation with all the resources of the state government.’

The portions of the other article alleged to be libelous appear under an article with a headline and sub-headline as follows:

‘Widow Ready to Lose Job for Sake of Justice

‘Mrs. Kelly at First Refused to Talk But Confronted With Torn Affidavit Tells All.’

And the portions of the paragraphs complained about are:

“We have information, Mrs. Kelly, that you have been taxed about $100 a month by Judge Cook to keep your job as court reporter.'

“We have enough now to start an investigation by the state's attorney. You know that's a criminal offense, bribing a public official to keep your job.”

The amended complaint charged the defendants with having published the alleged libelous statements maliciously, in the knowledge that they were false, or that in the exercise of ordinary diligence they could have ascertained that they were false, and that the statements were false, scandalous, malicious and defamatory. Plaintiff also alleged that he had been greatly injured in his good name and reputation, and had been brought into public scandal, ridicule and disgrace, had been shunned and avoided by divers persons, and had been otherwise injured, and damages were alleged at $100,000.

The defendants-appellants, by proper pleadings below and here, allege as grounds for reversal of the judgment of the court, that the alleged libelous charges were true and published with good motives and for justifiable ends; that they were privileged as being a report of proceedings of a complaint filed with and proceedings before the Attorney General; and that they were privileged as being fair comment and criticism of a public officer and the right to review and comment upon a charge of inefficient and corrupt administration of government; and that the judgment is in violation of and a denial of the appellant's rights under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution of the State of Illinois, Smith-Hurd Stats., and under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. It is also claimed that the damages are excessive and should be no more than nominal if the judgment is permitted to stand.

Insofar as the defendants-appellants are concerned, the events leading up to the alleged libelous publication had their inception in the call of a reporter of the defendant publisher's Newspaper in the afternoon of August 24, 1934, at the office of Kevin Kane, a practicing lawyer in East St. Louis, as a matter of routine coverage of politics.

According to this reporter, Mr. Kane at that time directed his attention to parts of papers in his waste basket and gave him some information in relation to a matter between Charlotte R. Kelly and Judge Cook. As shown by the record, the reporter then returned to his office and had a conversation relative thereto with the City Editor of the Newspaper, and returned to Mr. Kane's office between 4:15 and 5:00 o'clock. When he arrived at Mr. Kane's office, Mr. Kane had gone, and the janitress was opening the office and he got the pieces of paper in the waste basket, tipped the janitress $4, and took the pieces back to his office and pieced them together. The money to tip the janitress and gain entrance to Mr. Kane's office had been obtained by the reporter from the business office of the Newspaper. When the reporter returned to the Newspaper office, he telephoned the City Editor, and as a result, he and another employee of the Paper pasted the pieces together on a cardboard. The pieces of paper as put together resulted in what was an unsigned statement of Charlotte R. Kelly, and is as follows:

‘East St. Louis, Ill.

‘August 24th, 1934

‘I, Charlotte R. Kelly, under solemn oath, do hereby swear that the following facts are correct:

‘I campaigned for Judge Ralph Cook when he was elected as City Judge in February, 1933 for which I received no recompense, having asked for none. Upon applying for the position of Court Reporter, I was told that in order to obtain same I would have to sacrifice one third of my salary which, at that time, was Thirty-Six Hundred Dollars per year. Having been without employment for some time, I was desperate for a position and accepted the terms. He stated he was in debt for his campaign. Since that time, I have paid him approximately One Thousand ($1000.00) Dollars and for the past three months May, June and July, have not given him any money. I told him I was unable, because of many debts, to give him any more salary; that I understood his campaign was paid for and wanted some money for myself. He told me in that event he would have to get some one else. I replied: ‘Well, if you do, they will not pay you Ninety Dollars.’ At the time I received my checks since May, his attitude has been surly and unbearable. On August 13th, 1934, he told me he was compelled to took for some on else, I replied. ‘Oh, I expected as much, it's finances that's bothering you, isn't it?’ He replied: ‘Well, partly, but you've been talking too much.’ I asked him what I had said and who to and he replied in some manner that I could not make sense of. He seemed not to be able to get his thoughts together and jumped from one matter to another without finishing it.

‘Since my appointment on February 13th, 1933 up to July, 1933 I received Thirteen Hundred fifty and no/100 Dollars of which I was obliged to sacrifice Four Hundred Eighty-two and 40/100 Dollars because of the Deficiency Bill at Springfield, this at the request of Governor Henry Horner. After July, 1933 my monthly income was Two Hundred Seventy Dollars of which I was expected to contribute Ninety-Dollars to Judge Ralph...