Galveston Tribune v. Guisti

Decision Date12 January 1911
Citation134 S.W. 239
PartiesGALVESTON TRIBUNE v. GUISTI et al.<SMALL><SUP>†</SUP></SMALL>
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Appeal from District Court, Galveston County; Clay S. Briggs, Judge.

Action by Pietrina Guisti and others against the Galveston Tribune. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Reversed and rendered.

Wm. B. Lockhart, for appellant. Marsene Johnson, Geo. G. Clough, Aubrey Fuller, and Elmo Johnson, for appellees.

PLEASANTS, C. J.

This is a suit to recover damages for libel, brought by the appellee Pietrina Guisti against the Galveston Tribune, a corporation, engaged in the business of publishing a newspaper in the city of Galveston, known as the Galveston Tribune. Before the trial in the court below the plaintiff intermarried with Amerigo Collucci. The amended petition upon which the cause was tried, and in which the husband joined pro forma, alleged that the defendant on or about the 14th day of December, 1908, through its newspaper, the Galveston Tribune, a daily paper having a large circulation in Galveston county and throughout the state of Texas, falsely, maliciously, recklessly, and wantonly printed, published, and circulated a malicious, slanderous libel of and concerning plaintiff, Pietrina Collucci, who was on said date an unmarried woman over the age of 21 years and resided with her father, T. Guisti, in the city of Galveston. The publication alleged to be libelous and the allegations of the petition upon which plaintiffs seek recovery are as follows:

"No More Liquor Sold to Students.

"As stated in the Tribune Friday evening, one of the first licenses issued by the city since August 1st for the conducting of a corner grocery saloon within the residence section prohibited by the districting ordinance was to T. Guisti, to sell liquor at 902 Mechanic street. One of the main objections to this saloon previous to the passing of the ordinance was its close proximity to the State Medical College, and the allegation that the proprietor of the place violated the provisions of the Baskin-McGregor law and the conditions of his bond by selling liquor to students. With the reopening of the barroom, the complaints to the dean of the college have been again renewed, and a personal investigation of the place by a representative of this paper this morning revealed the following facts: The place is open as usual for business, and, when the reporter called, liquor was being sold over the bar, together with lunch, in fact at the time a man was standing at the bar drinking a bottle of porter and eating a sandwich. The proprietor of the place was not present, but a young woman behind the bar, in answer to the question as to whether or not students were patrons of the place, stated in an excited way that `She was going to tell Dr. Carter to put bells around the necks of the students, so they could tell who they were. When we ask young men if they are students, they get mad and tell us that it is none of our business. We can't tell, and we are here to do business.' Asked if there had been any sales to students since the place reopened, she admitted that there had been, and that it took place on Saturday morning. `Two young men came in and asked for some wine. They told me they were not students, and I sold them what they wanted; then after they had drank it, they said they were students and laughed.' On the door leading from Ninth street into the barroom annex, on the wall facing the door and behind the bar, are signs printed by hand on white cardboard, with the following wording: `No Liquor of any Kind Sold Here to Students.' The young woman pointed to these signs and stated that they were put there on Saturday evening for the students to read themselves when they came in. Asked if she was not familiar with the provisions of the law regulating such sales, and that dealers are supposed to know whether customers are students or not, she answered `That she did not know for sure,' but that `they did not want to sell to students.' Bond has such provision. It is set forth in all liquor dealers' bonds, among other things, that the bond is conditional that the principal, agent, or employé will not sell or permit to be sold or given away any spirituous, vinous or malt liquors, or medicated bitters to a student of any institution of learning. It is also stated by legal authorities that ignorance of this law or of the fact that the dealer or employé cannot tell who a student is does not in any manner excuse; they are supposed to know their customers, and in case of doubt to take the safe course and refuse to sell. The place named above has been complained of, and it is understood from neighbors that the students inclined to patronize such places are attracted there for some reason. On two of the opposite corners are located corner groceries which formerly had bar annexes, but neither of them have as yet renewed their licenses. A woman in charge of one of the places stated this morning that she did not intend to take out a license, as she realized that the time was short when the place would be allowed to exist, and she was satisfied to continue her other business without beer."

The plaintiff further alleged that the "young woman" referred to by defendant in the article above quoted, meant and was by defendant intended to mean the plaintiff, Pietrina Collucci (née Guisti); and that said article is wholly false and untrue, and is scandalous, libelous and defamatory.

"Plaintiffs further alleged that said false, slanderous, libelous statement published and circulated by defendant, as aforesaid, on said December 14, 1908, was read by a great number of citizens of Galveston county, Texas, and was read by numbers of citizens of the state of Texas residing in other counties in said state, to the shame, humiliation, and distress of mind and injury to the reputation of the plaintiff, Pietrina Collucci (née Guisti) and to her great damage, general and special, as hereinafter fully set out.

"Plaintiff further alleged that by the following words used in said publication, to wit, `The proprietor of the place was not present, but a young woman behind the bar, in answer to the question as to whether or not students were patrons of the place, stated in an excited way that "she was going to tell Dr. Carter to put bells around the necks of the students, so they could tell who they were." "When we ask young men if they are students, they get mad and tell us that it is none of our business. We can't tell, and we are here for business." Asked if there had been any sales to students since the place reopened, she admitted that there had been and that it took place on Saturday morning. "Two young men came in and asked for some wine. They told me they were not students, and I sold them what they wanted; then after they had drank it they said they were students and laughed."' Defendant meant and intended to mean and publish that the plaintiff, Pietrina Collucci (née Guisti), was behind the bar, meaning the barroom; and that defendant meant and intended to mean and publish that said plaintiff was offering for sale and selling and had sold intoxicating liquor in a barroom to students of an institution of learning in violation of law.

"Plaintiff further alleged that the published statement of defendant that she, the said Pietrina Collucci (née Guisti), was a barmaid, serving and selling intoxicating liquors in a common barroom, caused her to lose the respect and esteem of her neighbors and acquaintances in the community in which she lived, and that the published statement of defendant, that she, said plaintiff, Pietrina Collucci (née Guisti) was aiding and abetting and conniving at violations of the law regulating the sale of intoxicating liquors in the state of Texas, impeached her integrity, and caused an ill opinion of her in the community in which she lives, and caused her to sustain damages by reason of the injury to her reputation as a woman of integrity, good conduct and good demeanor in the community in which she lives, and caused her to suffer much mental anguish and humiliation.

"And said plaintiff, Pietrina Collucci (née Guisti), further alleges that by the use of the following false, slanderous, and libelous words in said published statement, to wit, `The place named above has been complained of, and it is understood from neighbors that the students inclined to patronize such places are attracted there for some reason;' defendant meant, as an addition to the other matters hereinbefore quoted, that this plaintiff was used by her father as a barmaid in said barroom for the purpose of attracting medical students and other persons there for patronage; and meant and was intended to mean by the defendant that this plaintiff was a person of loose morals, and a person addicted to lascivious conduct, and that she, this plaintiff, was an attraction placed in said barroom by her father to entice and attract said medical students and other persons into said barroom, and that said published words last above quoted meant, and were by defendant intended to mean, that this plaintiff was an unchaste woman.

"And this plaintiff, Pietrina Collucci (née Guisti), alleges that by reason of said last-quoted false, slanderous, and libelous words of and concerning her, with the imputations and insinuations of defendant as aforesaid, caused her to sustain special injury and damages to her reputation as a woman of good morals, good conduct, good propriety and virtue, and caused her to suffer much mental pain, agony, distress of mind and humiliation, and degraded her in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Kutcher v. Post Printing Co.
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • 12 de abril de 1915
    ... ... with the facts alleged, a general demurrer should be ... sustained. ( Galveston Tribune v. Guisti (Tex.), 134 ... S.W. 239; Harris v. Santa Fe T. Co. (Tex.), 125 S.W ... 77; ... ...
  • Gibler v. Houston Post Co.
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 23 de janeiro de 1958
    ...before. We cannot yield assent to the latter proposition. Harris v. Santa Fe Townsite Co. , 125 S.W. 77, and Galveston Tribune v. Guisti [Tex.Civ.App.], 134 S.W. 239, cited by counsel in support of that proposition, are not regarded as analogous; and, besides, the Supreme Court has granted ......
  • McDavid v. Houston Chronicle Printing Co.
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 7 de fevereiro de 1912
    ...was uncertain before. We cannot yield assent to the latter proposition. Santa Fé Town Site Co. v. Harris, 125 S. W. 77, and Galveston Tribune v. Guisti, 134 S. W. 239, cited by counsel in support of that proposition, are not regarded as analogous; and, besides, the Supreme Court has granted......
  • Wick v. Express Pub. Co.
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 4 de outubro de 1934
    ...language by innuendo so as to place a construction upon the letter of which it was not fairly susceptible, citing Galveston Tribune v. Guisti (Tex. Civ. App.) 134 S. W. 239. Under the holding in Express Pub. Co. v. Wilkins (Tex. Civ. App.) 218 S. W. 614, 617, "whether a publication is privi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT