Hammond v. Times Pub. Co.
| Decision Date | 25 March 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 3885,3885 |
| Citation | 162 So.2d 681 |
| Parties | Charles L. HAMMOND, Appellant, v. The TIMES PUBLISHING CO., a Florida corporation, and Milton Beckerman, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
J. E. Satterfield, Tarpon Springs, for appellant.
Baynard, McLeod & Overton, St. Petersburg, for appellees.
BARKDULL, THOMAS H., Associate Judge.
This was a libel action. The appellant, plaintiff in the trial court, appeals a final judgment entered on the pleadings and urges two errors: 1. The vacation of a default originally entered against the appellees-defendants for failure to plead an amended complaint; 2. Error in the entry of the judgment on the pleadings.
As to the vacation of the default judgment, it is incumbent upon the appellant to demonstrate that the trial judge committed error in the entry of the order. See: People's Realty Co. v. Southern Colonization Co., 78 Fla. 628, 83 So. 527; Chaney v. Headley, Fla.1956, 90 So.2d 297. This record fails to demonstrate that the trial judge abused his discretion and, therefore, this action on his part should be affirmed on appeal. See: Benedict v. W. T. Hadlow Co., 52 Fla. 188, 42 So. 239; Stevens-Davis Co. v. Stock, 141 Fla. 714, 193 So. 745; Chaney v. Headley, supra. As to the second proposition of the judgment on the pleadings in favor of the appellees-defendants, the cause of action sounded in libel, per se. Therefore, the sufficiency of the complaint to warrant relief being granted to the appellant must be tested by the principles announced in McCormick v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, Fla.App.1962, 139 So.2d 197. Measuring this complaint by the test laid down therein, to wit: , it is apparent that even if the alleged faulty material were eliminated from the complainted of article, it would not change the conclusions which would be reached by the ordinary man. Therefore, the complained of article is not libelous, per se. The complaint of the appellant bottomed solely on the article being libelous, per se. And, not meeting the test announced in the case of McCormick v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, supra, the appellant has failed to demonstrate error in the complained of ruling of the trial judge. Therefore, he has failed to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Perez v. City of Key West, Fla.
...were used defamatorily, the sufficiency of such a statement depends on whether the words were libelous per se. Hammond v. Times Publishing, 162 So.2d 681 (2nd D.C.A.1964) reh. den. Such words are actionable per se if by general consent their character is injurious e.g., conduct, characteris......
-
Smith v. Cuban American Nat. Foundation, 96-2702.
...235 So.2d 759 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970); Hill v. Lakeland Ledger Publ'g Corp., 231 So.2d 254, 256 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970); Hammond v. Times Publ'g Co., 162 So.2d 681, 682 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964); McCormick, 139 So.2d at The Florida standard jury instructions on defamation do not explicitly include an instru......
-
Early v. Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc.
...a verdict for the plaintiff. McCormick v. Miami Herald Publishing Co., 139 So.2d 197, 200 (Fla.2d DCA 1962); Hammond v. Times Publishing Co., 162 So.2d 681, 682 (Fla.2d DCA 1964); Layne v. Tribune Company, 108 Fla. 177, 146 So. 234, 238 (1933); Johnson v. Finance Acceptance Co., 118 Fla. 39......
- Thomas J. Cardwell v. State of Florida.