Midland Pub. Co. v. Implement Trade Journal Co.

• Decision Date: 15 November 1904
• Citation: 83 S.W. 298,108 Mo. App. 223
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
• Parties: MIDLAND PUB. CO. v. IMPLEMENT TRADE JOURNAL CO. et al.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL>

83 S.W. 298

108 Mo. App. 223

MIDLAND PUB. CO. v. IMPLEMENT TRADE JOURNAL CO. et al.^*

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

November 15, 1904.

LIBEL — ARTICLES LIBELOUS PER SE — LIBEL OF CORPORATION — PLEADING — INNUENDO — PRAYER FOR DAMAGES.

1. A publication beginning: "Hints to advertisers. This is from the fake trade journal published at St. Louis" — is libelous per se.

2. A prayer for relief in a petition for libel, stating that plaintiff has been actually damaged in the sum of $1,000, for which sum, together with the sum of $9,000 as punitive damages, and the costs of this action, he prays judgment, sufficiently complies with Rev. St. 1899, § 594, providing that in all actions where exemplary or punitive damages are recoverable the petition shall state separately the amount of such damages sought to be recovered.

3. A publication charging a trade journal with being a "fake" is a libel on the manager and publisher of the paper.

4. A publication stating that "Mr. Crooked R. gets it in the neck" is a libel of R. individually, and cannot be enlarged by innuendo so as to constitute a libel of a corporation of which R. is manager, in the absence of an allegation that R. and the corporation are one and the same person, or that people generally understand the corporation to be meant when R. is referred to in the connection in which the libel is published.

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Horatio D. Wood, Judge.

Action by the Midland Publishing Company against the Implement Trade Journal Company, and others. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Reversed in part.

This action is for libel, brought in the St. Louis circuit court by the Midland Publishing Company, a corporation, and the owner and publisher of a trade journal known as "Farm Machinery," against the Implement Trade Journal Company, a corporation, and the owner and publisher of a magazine called the "Implement Trade Journal," published at Kansas City, Mo., and also against C. B. Hall, Carl J. Simpson, and James E. Baird. The petition contains two counts. In the first it is alleged that defendants on October 15, 1900, printed and published of and concerning the plaintiff the following libel:

"Hints to Advertisers. This is from the fake implement trade paper published at St. Louis: `According to the American Newspaper Directory, June, 1900, edition, Farm Machinery is the only implement trade newspaper at Kansas City having a circulation exceeding 2,250 copies.' This is a letter of inquiry from the Implement Trade Journal Co.: `Kansas City, Oct. 6, 1900. American Newspaper Directory, New York, N. Y. Gentlemen: Will you kindly inform us if you have received a report of circulation at any time during the present year from this office and oblige, Yours truly, Implement Trade Journal Co. By C. F. Hall, Mgr.' This is the reply to the Implement Trade Journal Company's letter of inquiry: `New York, Oct. 8, 1900. Publishers of Implement Trade Journal, Kansas City, Mo. Dear Sirs: In answer to your favor of the 6th inst., we beg to inform you that there has been no circulation statement received from your paper during this or last year. Respectfully, The American Newspaper Directory. By P. M. Ayrad.'"

By way of innuendo, the following is alleged: "Meaning by the words, `the fake implement trade paper published at St. Louis,' plaintiff's said journal, `Farm Machinery,' and intending thereby to charge and to cause it to be believed of and concerning plaintiff, among said manufacturers and dealers, that said plaintiff had been guilty of deceit and dishonorable trickery in the conduct of its said business." It is also alleged that defendants Hall, Simpson and Baird are the managing officers of the defendant.

The second count alleges that on the 15th day of October, 1900, the defendant printed and published of and concerning plaintiff the following libel:

"Mr. Crooked K. Reifsnider Gets It in the Neck Again. This is from the `Iron Age': A somewhat curious state of affairs has developed in the case of the awards to collective exhibits at the Paris Exposition. It appears that each contributor to such a collective exhibit has a title the same as individuals to the award given to the combined exhibit. Thus a gold medal was awarded to the United States Association of American Advertisers, who had brought together a representative collection of posters and other advertising matter. Each one of the concerns who sent a copy of a poster may with justice claim that a gold medal was awarded to him, and might allow the inference to be drawn that it was for his product, which might not have come within two thousand miles of Paris. At the exposition there is a special newspaper building in which there is a collection of the technical and trade journals of the United States, with facilities for studying their contents. It is a deserved tribute to this class of journalism that a grand prize has been given for it. A short time since the journals represented were officially advised that each, individually, is entitled to the use of this grand prize, the David Williams Company alone receiving three such notices for its publications. Of all our contemporaries, only one has claimed the credit for this distinction without a word of explanation as to the manner in which it was obtained. Of all the others, those who have taken any notice of it all modestly waive their share in the common glory. It is worthy of note that not a single American journal which had an exhibit of its own received a grand prize. In fact, not a newspaper in the world received that award, so far as we have been able to discover from a study of the official catalogue. The incident is one which might be passed over unnoticed, were it not for the danger that the public may be imposed upon by those who have not seriously contributed to the recognition of American progress, but have merely been incidental contributors to a collective exhibit. It is even possible that such contributors have actually lowered the general standard of excellence, and yet may parade an award as a proof of individual merit." This is followed by the following innuendo: "Meaning by the words, `Mr. Crooked K. Reifsnider gets it in the neck again,' the said Calvin K. Reifsnider, editor of said `Farm Machinery,' and general and responsible manager of plaintiff in the transaction of its business, and intending thereby to charge and to cause it to be believed of and concerning plaintiff, especially among manufacturers and dealers in farm implements, that said plaintiff had been guilty of deceit and dishonorable trickery in the conduct of its said business."

The answers were general denials.

The jury found for plaintiff on both counts, and assessed its actual damages at $1 on each count, and punitive damages at $500 on the first and $600 on the second count. Defendants appealed.

Plaintiff's evidence shows that the alleged libels were published as alleged, and their publication extensively circulated. It shows that plaintiff was the publisher of Farm Machinery, a periodical especially devoted to manufacturers and dealers in farm implements, and that said journal has a wide...