Riceman v. Union Indemnity Co.

• Decision Date: 25 January 1932
• Citation: 278 Mass. 149
• Parties: JOSEPH RICEMAN v. UNION INDEMNITY COMPANY.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

278 Mass. 149

JOSEPH RICEMAN v. UNION INDEMNITY COMPANY.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

January 25, 1932

December 15, 1931.

Present: RUGG, C.

J., CROSBY, WAIT SANDERSON, & FIELD, JJ.

Libel.

In an action of tort for libel by an attorney against a corporation engaged in the writing of surety insurance, the declaration alleged that the defendant "published at Boston" a letter and report purporting to be

"From Boston" and addressed to its surety claim divisions at New York and Kansas City, and stating that two men "along with" the plaintiff called at the defendant's Boston office and "presented the following facts relating to their end of the case": the plaintiff was president and one of the other men was treasurer of a lodge of a fraternal order "and three of them ran a bootlegging enterprise at the Club. . . . they paid a . . . [certain person] to maintain the room to run the bootlegging racket and these slot machines." A demurrer to the declaration was sustained. The defendant did not contend that such statements were not libellous if they referred to the plaintiff. Held, that

(1) Even if the letter, because sent only to certain departments of the defendant in the other cities, was not a publication of the libel to a third person, nevertheless, the truth of the allegation in the declaration concerning publication in Boston was admitted upon demurrer and was a sufficient allegation of publication;

(2) The language used in the letter, taken in its natural and ordinary meaning, was capable of being understood by the average man as meaning that the plaintiff was engaged in or connected with the illegal enterprises described;

(3) The demurrer should have been overruled.

It was stated that with reference to the law of libel, to charge a person with being a "bootlegger" is to charge him with committing an offence against the criminal law.

TORT. Writ dated June 3, 1931. The declaration is described in the opinion. In the Superior Court, the defendant demurred. The demurrer was heard by F.T. Hammond, J., and was sustained. The plaintiff appealed.

S.R. Cutler, for the plaintiff. F.G. Moulton, for the defendant.

SANDERSON, J. This is an action for libel brought to this court by appeal of the plaintiff from an order of the Superior Court sustaining the defendant's demurrer to the declaration on the ground (1) that the pleadings do not set out any sufficient legal cause of action and (2) that the written statement alleged to have been made by the defendant and set out in the declaration is not as matter of law sufficient to constitute a libel of the plaintiff by the defendant.

The declaration alleges that the defendant falsely and maliciously wrote and published at Boston of and concerning the plaintiff in a letter and report the words following: "UNION INDEMNITY COMPANY Cash Capital $2,500,000 Surety Division of Insurance Securities Company, Inc. Casualty To New York Att. Mr Hawley, Surety Claim Division From Boston March 2nd, 1931 Kansas City Surety Claim Division, C.L. Barr, Manager, Title & Trust Bldg., Kansas City, Mo. c/o FRATERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES, Converse Building, Kansas City, Mo. RE: Max Beckerman To FRATERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES Principal Statement Mr. Glixman of 54 Summer Street, Revere, and Mr. Max Beckerman of 730 Winthrop Avenue along with Attorney

Joseph Riceman of 294 Washington Street, Boston, called at the office and presented the following facts relating to their end of the case. Riceman was President of the lodge and Beckerman as Treasurer, and three of them ran a bootlegging enterprise at the Club. Two rooms were leased under a straw lease and they paid a John Singer $50. per week to maintain the room to run the bootlegging racket and these slot machines, and they paid rent to the Club for the use of these two rooms. . . . As a matter of fact I questioned them as to the amount of rent paid and the only thing that they wished to say was that they paid $50. per week to a man to take care of the two rooms and run the racket and that the Club did not pay him his salary but he was paid out of the profits of this racket . . . and that this fund was made up and called a Special Fund through which the proceeds of the sale of beer was given, but it had absolutely nothing to do with the function of the Organization that it was a separate enterprise." The plaintiff further alleged that by reason of the false malicious and defamatory writing he was brought into ridicule and contempt among his associates and friends; that he was deprived of his membership in a fraternal organization, namely, the Fraternal...