McKinney v. Cooper
Citation | 163 Or. 512,98 P.2d 711 |
Parties | McKINNEY <I>v.</I> COOPER |
Decision Date | 30 January 1940 |
Court | Supreme Court of Oregon |
See 17 R.C.L. 335 (6 Perm. Supp., 4254) 36 C.J. Libel and Slander, § 236
Appeal from Circuit Court, Lake County.
Action by T.S. McKinney against Forest E. Cooper to recover damages resulting from an alleged libel. From a judgment dismissing the action, plaintiff appeals.
AFFIRMED.
Herbert P. Welch, of Lakeview, for appellant.
Henry E. Perkins, of Klamath Falls, for respondent.
This is an action to recover damages resulting from an alleged libel published of and concerning the plaintiff. A demurrer to the complaint was sustained on the ground that no cause of action was alleged. On refusal of the plaintiff to plead further, a judgment was entered dismissing the action. Plaintiff appeals.
The plaintiff in his complaint alleges:
`That for a sixteenth objection to the final account and administration of Harry S. Stone, executor resigned, the objectors allege:
I.
`The objectors object to the following items of expenditure set forth in said final account on page 14 thereof, to-wit: "February 23, 1935, T.S. McKinney, attorney fees $249.50," and in support of such objection further allege:
II.
`That services of such value were not rendered by the said T.S. McKinney to the estate.
III.
`That at all times that said T.S. McKinney was retained as attorney for the executor resigned, he owed a duty to disclose to the devisees and legatees of the estate the true condition thereof whenever requested for such information. That he was at all times entitled to payment for services rendered the estate, with funds of the estate, a fact which he well knew, and therefore, owed a duty to the devisees and the legatees as well as to their representative, the executor resigned.
IV.
`That on May 1, 1934, a conference was held in the office of the said T.S. McKinney, attorney at law, at Lakeview, Oregon, at which there were present the said T.S. McKinney; the executor resigned; Lewis N. Wiley, one of the devisees and legatees of the last will and testament of Lewis A. Carriker, deceased, and one of the objectors; Lester K. Vandever, attorney at law, Hillsboro, Illinois, then and there acting as attorney for most of the devisees and legatees of the estate; and Forrest E. Cooper, attorney at law, Lakeview, Oregon, then and there serving in a similar capacity.
V.
`That one subject then and there discussed was ways and means of obtaining an appeal bond in the case of C.V. Vandiver and wife versus the executor resigned and all of the beneficiaries of the estate. The executor resigned and the said T.S. McKinney then and there stated that the bonding companies had refused to write the bond. They were then and there asked if it were not true that the estate had cash then and there on deposit in the Commercial National...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ramstead v. Morgan
...463 (1909). The absolute immunity attaches to statements made in the course of, or incident to a judicial proceeding. McKinney v. Cooper, 1940, 163 Or. 512, 98 P.2d 711 (objections to estate accounting); Irwin v. Ashurst, 1938, 158 Or. 61, 74 P.2d 1127 (judge and counsel); Pitts v. King, 19......
-
Grubb v. Johnson
...Irwin v. Ashurst, 158 Or. 61, 74 P.2d 1127; pleadings or publications filed by an attorney in the course of litigation, McKinney v. Cooper, 163 Or. 512, 98 P.2d 711; private litigants or private prosecutors or defendants in a criminal prosecution, Strycker v. Levell and Peterson, 183 Or. 59......
-
McKenna v. Crawford
...accorded communications made by attorneys in judicial proceedings." Troutman v. Erlandson, 286 Or. 3, 6 (1979) (citing McKinney v. Cooper, 163 Or. 512 (1940)). The court has "[l]ikewise . . . recognized the absolute privilege of communications made by parties in judicial proceedings." Id. (......
-
Franson v. Radich
...communications made by attorneys in judicial proceedings." The privilege applies to anything that may be pertinent. McKinney v. Cooper, 163 Or. 512, 519, 98 P.2d 711 (1940). Although the absolute attorney privilege question most frequently arises in defamation actions, this court has held t......