Crocker v. Hadley

• Citation: 1 N.E. 734, 102 Ind. 416
• Case Date: June 23, 1885
• Court: Supreme Court of Indiana

102 Ind. 416
1 N.E. 734

Crocker
v.
Hadley.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

Filed June 23, 1885.

Appeal from Wayne circuit court.

D. W. Comstock and Joseph H. Kibbey, for appellant.

Fox, Peelle & Robbins, for appellee.

Howk, J.

This was a suit by the appellee, Hadley, to recover damages from the appellant, Crocker, for his publication of an alleged libel. The cause was put at issue and tried by a jury, and a verdict was returned for the appellee, assessing his damages in the sum of $250. Over the appellant's motion for a new trial, judgment was rendered against him on the verdict. Several errors are assigned by appellant, in this court; but his counsel have confined their argument chiefly to the alleged error of the court in overruling his motion for a new trial. Counsel say: “It is admitted by the appellant that he wrote and procured the publication of the alleged libelous article.” Appellant's counsel claims, however, that the inunendoes in appellee's complaint place a forced and unnatural meaning on the language used in the published article; and, to some extent, this may be true. The published article is too long to be copied in this opinion; but it denounced the appellee as a “hoary-headed filcher,” and charged that “John C. Hadley has sold himself, Judas-like, for a few pieces of silver to sell his neighbors out.” We need not argue for the purpose of showing that the publication of an article, containing such expressions as those quoted, in a public newspaper, is a libelous publication. It is not necessary that a crime should be charged in accurate or technical language, in a written or printed publication, in order to constitute such publication a libel. Any written or printed publication

[1 N.E. 735]

which holds a person up to scorn or ridicule, or to a stronger feeling of contempt or execration, or which imputes or implies his commission of a crime not directly charged, is a libelous publication. This is the settled law on this subject in this state. Gabe v. McGinnis, 68 Ind. 538, and authorities cited; Bain v. Myrick, 88 Ind. 137;Young v. Clegg, 93 Ind. 371;Hake v. Brames, 95 Ind. 161.

There is evidence in the record which tends to sustain the verdict on every material point. In such case, as has often been decided, this court will not disturb the verdict, on what might seem to be the weight of the evidence. City of Anderson v. O'Conner, 98 Ind. 168.

It is claimed, also, that the damages assessed were excessive, but we cannot reverse the judgment...