Maloof v. Post Pub. Co.

• Citation: 306 Mass. 279,28 N.E.2d 458
• Parties: MALOOF v. POST PUB. CO., and seven other cases.
• Decision Date: 27 June 1940
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

306 Mass. 279

28 N.E.2d 458

MALOOF

v.POST PUB. CO., and seven other cases.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

June 27, 1940.

Exceptions from Superior Court, Suffolk County; Greenhalge, Judge.

Actions for alleged libel by Edward Maloof, by next friend, against Post Publishing Company; by Edward Maloof against the Northeastern Publishing Company; by William Hadge, by next friend, against the Post Publishing Company; by William Hadge, by next friend, against the Northeastern Publishing Company; by Fred Aborjailly, by next friend, against the Post Publishing Company; by Fred Aborjailly, by next friend, against the Northeastern Publishing Company; by Gabriel Daher against the Post Publishing Company; and by Gabriel Daher against the Northeastern Publishing Company. A verdict was returned for defendant in each case, and plaintiffs bring exceptions.

Exceptions sustained.G. I. Kellaher and E. P. Keleher, both of Boston, for plaintiffs.

E. A. Whitman and G. May, both of Boston, for defendants.

LUMMUS, Justice.

These are eight actions by four young men, Maloof, Hadge, Aborjailly and Daher, each of whom brought an action for libel against each of two newspaper corporations publishing respectively the Boston Post and the Boston Daily Record. The alleged libels concerned the four plaintiffs and one James Abdella. The substance of the libels was that the five men were members of a gang of extortionists, and told one Zanditton, a garage proprietor, that they had been hired to kill him but would spare him if he would pay $25, which he paid them. On a later date, the newspapers asserted, they demanded $50 more from him, but before he paid it the police were notified and arrested the five men near Zanditton's garage. At the trial, the jury returned a verdict for the defendant in each of the eight cases. The exceptions of the several plaintiffs bring the cases here.

The libels complained of charged the several plaintiffs with the crime of extortion. G.L.(Ter.Ed.) c. 265, § 25. It is not denied that they were defamatory as matter of law. See Lundin v. Post Publishing Co., 217 Mass. 213, 218, 104 N.E. 480, 52 L.R.A.,N.S., 207; Ingalls v. Hastings & Sons Publishing Co., Mass., 22 N.E.2d 657;Warner v. Fuller, 245 Mass. 520, 523, 139 N.E. 811. The only defence was the truth of the charge. G.L. (Ter.Ed.) c. 231, § 92. Warner v. Fuller, 245 Mass. 520, 523,139 N.E.2d 811;Comerford v. Meier, Mass., 19 N.E.2d 711. The burden of proof was on the defendants to maintain that defence by showing the substantial truth of the charge in all material respects. Perry v. Porter, 124 Mass. 338;Conner v. Standard Publishing Co., 183 Mass. 474, 478, 67 N.E. 596;Lynch v. Lyons, Mass., 20 N.E.2d 953. It was not sufficient for the defendants to show that the plaintiffs were arrested on the charge of extortion, as in Thompson v. Globe Newspaper Co., 279 Mass. 176, 188, 181 N.E. 249, for in the present cases the charge was that the plaintiff actually were guilty of extortion. The fact that the charge was qualified by the words ‘it is alleged’ or their equivalent, does not absolve the defendants from responsibility for publishing it. An accusation purporting to rest on hearsay is none the less defamatory. Lundin v. Post Publishing Co., 217 Mass. 213, 215, 104 N.E. 480, 52 L.R.A.,N.S., 207; Hurley v. Fall River Daily Herald Publishing Co., 138 Mass. 334, 336;Haynes v. Clinton Printing Co., 169 Mass. 512, 513, 48 N.E. 275;Kenney v. McLaughlin, 5 Gray 3,66 Am.Dec. 345;Cowley v. Pulsifer, 137 Mass. 392, 50 Am.Rep. 318;Peck v. Wakefield Item Co., 280 Mass. 451, 456, 183 N.E. 70;Mahoney v. Belford, 132 Mass. 393, 394.

The four plaintiffs conceded that on the evening of August 18, 1932, they were riding in an automobile driven by Aborjailly and owned by his father, and that Abdella rode with them to Zanditton's garage. There was evidence that Abdella asked Aborjailly to drive him to the garage where, Abdella said, his own automobile was being repaired. Abdella got in, rode...