Richardson v. Thorpe
| Decision Date | 03 April 1906 |
| Citation | 63 A. 580,73 N.H. 532 |
| Parties | RICHARDSON v. THORPE. |
| Court | New Hampshire Supreme Court |
Exceptions from Superior Court; Stone, Judge.
Action by Albert J. Richardson against Charles H. Thorpe. From an order overruling a demurrer to the declaration, defendant brings exceptions. Exceptions overruled.
Case for libel. The declaration alleges, in substance, that the plaintiff is an honest man and a good citizen, and that the defendant, well knowing these facts and intending to injure the plaintiff, maliciously published the following false and libelous words concerning him: hand in your pocket and steals your money is a gentleman (meaning thereby that the plaintiff is worse than a thief, that he has committed the crime of robbery, and that the methods employed by him were more contemptible than those of a pickpocket). Now he (meaning the plaintiff) gets up in town and cries, Farmers, how did you come out with this man (meaning the plaintiff) before (meaning and intimating that the plaintiff had in his transactions with the farmers of his own and adjoining towns swindled and defrauded them, referring to his bankruptcy proceedings aforesaid)? Do you want any more of him (meaning the plaintiff, and that any relation with him would be to their detriment)?" The defendant demurred to the declaration because (1) the words of the alleged defamatory publication are not actionable in and of themselves, and the declaration does not allege that the plaintiff has sustained any special damages; (2) the words are capable of an innocent construction, and in such cases it cannot be shown that the defendant used them in a libelous sense, even if he alleges it by way of an innuendo. The demurrer was overruled and the defendant excepted.
Everett C. Howe, Smith & Smith, and Oliver E. Branch, for plaintiff. Fred C. Cleaveland and Scott Sloane, for defendant.
Any written words which directly or indirectly charge a person with a crime, or which tend to injure his reputation in any other way, or to expose him to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule, are defamatory. Such words, if published without lawful excuse or justification, constitute a libel; and the person in respect to whom they are written may maintain an action for them without either...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Frese v. MacDonald
...have consistently construed, and New Hampshire juries have regularly applied, for over one hundred years.38 E.g., Richardson v. Thorpe, 73 N.H. 532, 532, 63 A. 580 (1906) (defining defamation to include words "which tend to expose [a person] to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule"); Boyle ......
-
Frese v. Formella
...the requisite tendency of the false remarks. Indeed, for centuries factfinders have made such determinations. E.g., Richardson v. Thorpe, 73 N.H. 532, 534, 63 A. 580 (1906) (collecting cases for the proposition that whether an ambiguous phrase was defamatory is a question for the jury). The......
-
Julian v. Kansas City Star Co.
...244; Morrison v. Smith, 82 N.Y.S. 166, 83 A.D. 206; Bradley v. Cramer, 59 Wis. 309; Cunningham v. Underwood, 116 F. 807; Richardson v. Thorpe, 63 A. 580. (9) language, "Julian is remembered here as a member of the Legislature, who did well in a legislative way," is incapable of the innuendo......
-
Thomson v. Cash
...115 (1979); Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. supra ; Chagnon v. Union-Leader Corp., 103 N.H. 426, 174 A.2d 825 (1961); Richardson v. Thorpe, 73 N.H. 532, 63 A. 580 (1906). We are mindful that in the libel area there is a possibility that "the jury may award not only nominal damages, but substant......