Johnson v. Finance Acceptance Co. of Georgia
| Decision Date | 11 February 1935 |
| Citation | 159 So. 364,118 Fla. 397 |
| Parties | JOHNSON v. FINANCE ACCEPTANCE CO. OF GEORGIA. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Duval County; A. V. Long, Judge.
Action by C. H. Johnson against the Finance Acceptance Company of Georgia. To review orders granting defendant's motion for an instructed verdict and denying plaintiff's motion for a new trial, plaintiff brings error.
Affirmed.
COUNSEL Stanton Walker and W. P. Dineen, both of Jacksonville, for plaintiff in error.
Joseph H. Ross, of Jacksonville, for defendant in error.
October 14, 1931, defendant in error, Finance Acceptance Company purchased all notes and accounts receivable of the Johnson Discount Company with the alleged promise that it (Johnson Discount Company) would not go back into the small loan business in Jacksonville within a reasonable time.
November 5, 1931, Finance Acceptance Company addressed the following letter to Ray Chapman, one of its clients whose note was among those purchased from Johnson Discount Company:
In January, 1932, C. H. Johnson, the plaintiff in error, who was plaintiff below, and the owner of Johnson Discount Company, brought a common-law action against Finance Acceptance Company; the declaration charging that the said letter was falsely, willfully, and maliciously designed to injure the plaintiff in his business and that the libelous words contained therein did in fact greatly injure and damage the plaintiff in his business to the extent of $50,000.
A demurrer to the declaration was overruled. Pleas were filed tendering the defense of not guilty, that the letter in question was published with good motives and the statements therein were true, that the writing and mailing of said letter was not the act and deed of an authorized agent of the defendant, nor was its contents within the scope of his authority to promulgate, and that said letter was privileged and was written without malice to the plaintiff. Demurrer to these pleas was overruled, and the cause went to trial on the issue made by the declaration and the pleas. At the conclusion of the plaintiff's testimony, motion for an instructed verdict in favor of the defendant was granted. A motion for a new trial was denied and the instant writ of error was prosecuted to both orders.
The plaintiff in error contends here that the court below erred in granting the motion for an instructed verdict because the declaration stated a ground of libel per se, while the defendant in error...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Turner v. Wells, Case No. 15-61855-CIV-GAYLES
...omitted).However, in a defamation per se action, the plaintiff does not need to show any special damages, see Johnson v. Fin. Acceptance Co. , 118 Fla. 397, 159 So. 364, 365 (1935), because "[p]er se defamatory statements are ‘so obviously defamatory’ and ‘damaging to reputation’ that they ......
-
Firestone v. Time, Inc.
...without allegation or proof of special damages. Briggs v. Brown, 55 Fla. 417, 46 So. 325 (1908), Johnson v. Finance Acceptance Co. of Georgia, 118 Fla. 397, 159 So. 364 (1935), Cooper v. Miami Herald Pub. Co., 159 Fla. 296, 31 So.2d 382 (1957), Campbell v. Jacksonville Kennel Club, 66 So.2d......
-
Caswell v. Manhattan Fire & Marine Insurance Co.
...Merriman v. Lewis, 141 Fla. 832, 194 So. 349 (1940) (employer's report to surety company not privileged), with Johnson v. Finance Acceptance Co., 118 Fla. 397, 159 So. 364 (1935) (letter from finance company to client concerning unethical practices of another company held For a communicatio......
-
Ordonez v. Icon Sky Holdings LLC
...damages need not be shown to sustain the action because malice is presented as a matter of law in such cases. Johnson v. Finance Acceptance Co., 118 Fla. 397, 400-01 (Fla. 1935). A publication constitutes libel per se under Florida law if, when considered alone without innuendo, it (a) char......