Shaffroth v. Tribune
| Citation | 61 Mont. 14 |
| Decision Date | 03 October 1921 |
| Docket Number | No. 4440.,4440. |
| Parties | SHAFFROTH v. THE TRIBUNE. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Montana |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Commissioners' Opinion.
Appeal from District Court, Cascade County; H. H. Ewing, Judge.
Action by Fred Shaffroth against The Tribune. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
E. A. Smith, of Great Falls, for appellant.
Freeman & Thelen and Norris & Hurd, all of Great Falls, for respondent.
Fred Shaffroth sued The Tribune, a Great Falls newspaper, for libel, alleging the libelous matter to be as follows:
“He Pleads Guilty to Grand Larceny
George Shaffroth is now awaiting sentence for grand larceny, to which charge he yesterday entered a plea of guilty in the district court before Judge H. H. Ewing. Shaffroth was arraigned upon an information which charged him with the theft on Nov. 10 of an Avery tractor magneto, valued at $90, the property of the Avery Company, which was taken from the possession of the Great Northern Railway. He appeared without counsel and waiving all his rights to time he entered a plea of guilty and was remanded to the custody of the sheriff to be brought up later for sentence.”
To the amended complaint the trial court sustained a general demurrer, and some time thereafter rendered judgment for the defendant, plaintiff standing on the amended complaint. From the judgment plaintiff appeals. The error predicated will be disposed of in an analysis of the complaint.
Reading the article alleged to be libelous, and viewing it in the light most favorable to plaintiff's contention, produce but mental confusion as to the name of the accused. Taking the entire statement “as a stranger might look at it without the aid of the knowledge possessed by the parties concerned” can leave no doubt but that the accused who admitted the theft is George Shaffroth, and not Fred.
It is well-settled law that the words used in the alleged libelous article must be susceptible of but one meaning to constitute libel per se, and that the libelous matter may not be segregated from other parts and construed alone. Paxton v. Woodward, 31 Mont. 195, 78 Pac. 215, 107 Am. St. Rep. 416, 3 Ann. Cas. 546;Brown v. Independent Pub. Co., 48 Mont. 374, 138 Pac. 258.
The latter case is determinative of the question involved here. The complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
For the reasons herein contained, we recommend that the judgment...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Keller v. Safeway Stores
...used must be susceptible of but one meaning. Brown v. Independent Publishing Company, supra 48 Mont. 374, 138 P. 258; Shaffroth v. The Tribune, 61 Mont. 14, 201 P. 271. If the words are not actionable per se, there can be no recovery of general damages, because in such a case the law, in th......
-
Keller v. Safeway Stores, Inc.
...P. 1035; Woolston v. Montana Free Press, supra; Cooper v. Romney, 49 Mont. 119, 141 P. 289, Ann.Cas.1916A, 596;Shaffroth v. The Tribune, 61 Mont. 14, 201 P. 271. (5) If the language is not slanderous per se, it cannot be made so by innuendo (Daniel v. Moncure, supra; Brown v. Independent Pu......
-
Keller v. Safeway Stores, Inc.
...239 P. 1035; Woolston v. Montana Free Press, supra; Cooper v. Romney, 49 Mont. 119, 141 P. 289, Ann.Cas.1916A, 596; Shaffroth v. The Tribune, 61 Mont. 14, 201 P. 271. (5) the language is not slanderous per se, it cannot be made so by innuendo (Daniel v. Moncure, supra; Brown v. Independent ......
-
Dillard v. Shattuck
...be construed as a stranger might look at it without the aid of the knowledge possessed by the parties concerned. Shaffroth v. The Tribune, 61 Mont. 14, 201 P. 271. And it should be given its plain and natural meaning, and be understood by courts and juries as other people hearing or reading......