Orchard v. Globe Printing Co.
Decision Date | 29 February 1912 |
Citation | 240 Mo. 575,144 S.W. 812 |
Parties | ORCHARD v. GLOBE PRINTING CO. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Butler County; J. C. Sheppard, Judge.
Action by George C. Orchard against the Globe Printing Company. Demurrer was sustained to the petition, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Reed, Yates, Mastin & Harvey, for appellant. A. C. Clover, Ernest Green, and D. W. Hill, for respondent.
Libel in the Butler circuit court. Suit brought November 3, 1906. Plaintiff was cast on demurrer to his petition in 1908. The alleged libel lies in a circular, an appeal to their fellow Democrats of Butler county by Henry and John Lacks, published by defendant November 8, 1904, and which publication, prefixed by certain headnotes and explanation, was followed by a reference to political conditions in that county; the whole, as set forth in the petition, reading:
The substantive averments of the petition are that defendant publishes a paper called the St. Louis Globe-Democrat, of large circulation in Butler and surrounding counties, and in the state of Missouri where plaintiff is well known, and throughout the United States; that plaintiff had always demeaned himself as an honest and faithful citizen of the state and of Butler county, and was reputed and esteemed among his neighbors and acquantainces a person of good name, fame, and credit. Further (quoting): "And plaintiff alleges that defendant well knowing such fact, and intending wickedly and maliciously to injure plaintiff in his good name, fame, and credit, and to bring him into public hatred, scorn, ridicule, contempt, infamy, and disgrace and to deprive him of the benefits of public confidence, and to cause it to be believed by his neighbors and among good and worthy citizens of the state of Missouri that plaintiff had been guilty of corrupt, dishonest, and dishonorable and criminal conduct in and about the soliciting, procuring, and obtaining votes for and upon behalf of one Sam Phillips, who was the regularly and lawfully nominated candidate for the office of Representative in the Lower House of the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, to be voted for as such at a regular and legal state and county election to be held in the county of Butler and state of Missouri on the 8th day of November, 1904, and in order to cause it to be believed by said hereinbefore mentioned persons that the plaintiff had been guilty of criminal conduct and practices, and of boodleism and bribery in order to induce qualified voters at such election to vote for said Sam Phillips as and for said office, and in order to cause it to be believed by said persons hereinbefore mentioned and the public generally that the plaintiff had been guilty of a violation of the criminal practice act and laws of the state of Missouri then in force pertaining to elections, and had been guilty of the crime of bribery by directly or indirectly giving, offering, promising to procure, or endeavoring to procure a valuable consideration (and an award) (sic) to or for legally qualified voters at said election so to be held as aforesaid, in order to induce said voters to vote for the said Sam Phillips for said office of Representative or member of the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, and intending to vex, oppress, impoverish and wholly ruin the plaintiff did, on the 8th day of November, 1904, in the newspaper known as St. Louis Globe-Democrat, publish of and concerning the plaintiff a certain false, wicked, malicious, defamatory, and libelous article, which said article was thereafter by the defendant wickedly published and circulated, to wit, to the number of more than 100,000 copies throughout the county of Butler in said state and throughout the entire state of Missouri, and throughout the United States generally as follows, to wit:" (Here follows the publication hereinbefore set forth.)
The further allegations are that the statements made in the circular were well known by defendant to be absolutely false and untrue; that they were published with the malicious and express purpose of defaming and injuring plaintiff; that the Globe-Democrat is generally considered of great...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Becker v. Brinkop
... ... Sotham v. Telegram ... Co., 239 Mo. 622. (3) It is libelous per se to publish ... any printing or picture indicating that a person is a liar ... Riley v. Lee et al., 21 Am. St. Rep. 362, ... published against a candidate is libelous per se. Smith ... v. Burrus, 106 Mo. 103; Orchard v. Globe Printing ... Co., 240 Mo. 575. (7) There is another reason to support ... the amended ... ...
-
Heitzeberg v. Von Hoffmann Press
...80 Mo. 564; Honea v. King, 243 S.W. 77; Cook v. Pulitzer Pub. Co., 241 Mo. 346; Walsh v. Pulitzer Pub. Co., 250 Mo. 149; Orchard v. Globe Ptg. Co., 240 Mo. 590; v. Feutterer Battery & Supply Co., 23 S.W.2d 63. (3) If the court be of the opinion that appellant's amended petition is not defec......
-
Becker v. Brinkop and Heil, 23040.
...4, and on p. 240. Any sort of false charge published against a candidate is libelous per se. Smith v. Burrus, 106 Mo. 103; Orchard v. Globe Printing Co., 240 Mo. 575. (7) There is another reason to support the amended petition and that is this. McGinnis v. Geo. Knapp & Co., 109 Mo. 139. (8)......
- Vantine v. Butler