Hollenbeck v. Post-Intelligencer Co.
Citation | 297 P. 793,162 Wash. 14 |
Decision Date | 09 April 1931 |
Docket Number | 22811. |
Parties | HOLLENBECK v. POST-INTELLIGENCER CO. |
Court | United States State Supreme Court of Washington |
Department 1.
Appeal from Superior Court, King County; John A. Frater, Judge.
Action by Eunice Hollenbeck against the Post-Intelligencer Company. Judgment sustaining a demurrer, and plaintiff appeals.
Reversed.
Walter B. Allen and L. A. Michelson, both of Seattle, for appellant.
Tanner & Garvin, of Seattle, for respondent.
A demurrer was sustained to the amended complaint of appellant in an action for libel and slander. Appellant refused to plead further, and the action was dismissed. This appeal resulted.
The amended complaint, omitting formal parts, is as follows:
Andy Head, thirty. The two were arrested and held in $1,000 bail.
'That said article was false and untrue in this--that the charges as published in said newspaper article were never made to the prosecuting attorney, or to the defendant or to anyone else prior to their said publication by the defendant; and that the said article as published was and is false and untrue in fact.
'That said article was falsely written, published and circulated by the defendant, of and concerning the plaintiff's home, place of business and herself, and was understood by persons who read the same, to refer to plaintiff's said home, place of business and herself, as the owner thereof.
'That said article was intended by the defendant to lead anyone reading the same to believe that the plaintiff's said rooming and boarding house was in fact a vice den, and those reading said article did conclude and understand that plaintiff's said rooming and boarding house was alleged to be a vice den.
'That said article was intended by the defendant to, and did in effect, charge the operator of said rooming house, to wit ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Holden v. American News Co.
...148 P. 774, Ann. Cas.1917B, 442; McKillip v. Grays Harbor Publishing Company, 100 Wash. 657, 171 P. 1026; Hollenbeck v. Post-Intelligencer Company, 162 Wash. 14, 18, 297 P. 793; Ziebell v. Lumbermens Printing Company, 14 Wash.2d 261, 266, 127 P.2d 677. However, each defendant pleaded affirm......
-
Owens v. Scott Pub. Co., 32780
...and Gaffney v. Scott Publishing Co., 35 Wash.2d 272, 212 P.2d 817. One of our cases in classification (b) is Hollenbeck v. Post-Intelligencer Co., 162 Wash. 14, 297 P. 793. (2) Cases in which the admitted facts or the facts found by the court or jury disclosed that, if there was a privilege......
-
Spangler v. Glover
...that he was the one referred to in the publication. Olympia Water Works v. Mottman, 88 Wash. 694, 153 P. 1074; Hollenbeck v. Post-Intelligencer Co., 162 Wash. 14, 297 P. 793. We are aware of the case of Ryan v. Hearst Publications, Inc., 3 Wash.2d 128, 100 P.2d 24, which at first glance mig......
-
Carey v. Hearst Publications, Inc.
...Pub. Co., supra; Hollenbeck v. Post-Intelligencer Co., 162 Wash. 14, 297 P. 793. In the case last cited, the court said, 162 Wash. at page 19, 297 P. at page 795: '* * * the privilege ends when falsity begins, and if, * * the charge is false, the privilege, if there was one, was therefore e......